Amaleq13

Not that exact sentence, no.

You said he didn't invent everything but you only identified two exceptions in a way suggesting they might be the only exceptions:

Inclusion of the phrase "for example" would have eliminated the appearance that these two are the only things he didn't invent.

Then you said he was part of a group who invented everything:
So, yes, you did claim that Eusebius invented the history of the Church but you also claimed he didn't do it alone and he didn't invent Marcion or Justin Martyr.

aa5874

This is absolutely astounding. You are actually re-confirming and admitting your own errors.

You are unbelievable.

You are blatant.

Look at the conclusion of the post again.

aa5874

It has become very clear to me, recently, that the re-construction of the Roman Church is far simpler than I ever imagined. In fact, I have already found the fundamental link, may be a year ago, that can show that many of the writings including 1 Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria Origen, Eusebius and others all contain fictitious information relating to the history of Jesus believers.

In order to show that these fore-mentioned writings all propagate fiction, these premises must be true.

1. Jesus of the NT did not exist.

2. There were no disciples of Jesus, including one called apostle Simon Peter, Simon Cephas

3. The Pauline writer called Paul is a backdated fiction writer.

Once the above premises are true, then every single writer that I have mentioned are either witnesses to fiction or knew or wrote about people that witnessed fiction.

But, to simplify the matter, I will just go to the first bishop of Rome called Peter, whose name the non-existent Jesus changed from Simon.

All writers who wrote that Peter was the first bishop and numerated the bishops that followed Peter wrote total fiction. Peter the apostle did not exist.

Peter could not have known Clement of Rome, the character called Clement of Rome is a fiction writer.

The letter called 1 Clement contains fiction wherever the writer mentioned the name Paul. Peter and Paul were never together. Peter was a non-existent character. The character Paul is a backdated fiction writer.

Many of the writers that I have mentioned are fiction writers, they wrote of a post-ascension period where fictitious characters participated in supposedly real events and were witnessed by real people who the writers knew.

Based on church writings, Polycarp knew the apostle John or knew people that knew John. This is total fiction John did not exist.

Now, I managed to locate some writers that did not ever in their extant writings mention any known post-ascension fiction.

These writers are Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch and Athenagoras.

These writers has nothing whatsoever about Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline letters, all post-ascension backdated fiction.

I will use these writings, Justin, Theophilus and Athenagoras, as of now, as the most likely true history of Jesus believers or christians until evidence can show these writings were also post ascension backdated fiction.

The 4th century Roman Church is the source for many of the so-called church writers, some of them being fiction writers well outside their alloted time zone.

Amaleq13

By quoting to you to establish your error? :huh:

In that you cannot believe what you don't understand, yes.

Yep, still irrelevant to your earlier words denying your recent assertion.

mountainman

We have two C14 citations:

(1) gJudas = 290 CE (plus or minus 60 years)
(nb: the gJudas team suggest a fourth century date)

(2) gThomas = 348 CE (plus or minus 60 years)
(nb: this is sourced from the Nag Hammadi Codices)

I welcome a third and fourth.

aa5874

Examine Irenaeus in Against Heresies 2.22, it will be noticed that he has written post-ascension fiction with respect to a fictitious disciple of the never-existent Jesus called John.

Excerpts of "Against Heresies" 22.2.5 The apostle John of the fiction called Jesus did not exist, he could not have live in Asia or until the time of Trajan.

Irenaeus could not have known anyone who knew or heard the apostle John.

Irenaeus is a fiction writer.

This is the fiction writer Irenaeus falsely claiming to know a person called Polycarp who knew the fictitious apostles.

"Against Heresies"3.3.4 Irenaeus could not have seen a person who saw any apostles that saw Jesus. The stories of Jesus and his twelve disciple were fabricted and backdated.

Polycarp then would have lived perhaps even before the Jesus stories were backdated.

Irenaeus is a post-ascension fiction story teller, and an eye-witness to Polycarp who witnessed fiction.

spamandham

Whatever dude. You keep talking about the last source in the 4th century. If you're not referring to Eusebius, then what the hell *are* you referring to?

...ah. but not Eusebius? :huh:

aa5874

I have isolated another passage in Against Heresies by Irenaeus that highlights post-ascension backdated fiction.

It is clearly evident that the fiction in Against Heresies were written at some other time later than the suggested time of Irenaeus.

Jesus did not exist. The apostles of Jesus were non-existent, inluding Peter, yet the writer called Irenaeus claimed Clement and Linus were aware of the fiction called apostles.

Clement and Polycarp are fiction, so also are the bishops that succeeded the fable Peter. The Roman church is fiction up to the time of Irenaeus and beyond.

This is the fiction writings of Irenaeus. There was no Church founded by the non-existent apostles.

Against Heresies 3.3.3 More fiction. The apostles with Peter did not exist, yet Clement was aware of them. Clement saw and spoke with them. This is blatant fiction.

AGAINST HERESIES 3.3.3 The fact that Peter was a the non-existent but yet was declared the 1st bishop of Rome will cause a catastrophic domino-effect.

When I push Peter, the whole history of Roman Church will fall to pieces. Forever.

It is Humpty-Dumpty time for the history of the CHURCH

aa5874

So far, the fiction writer called Irenaeus claimed he saw Polycarp.

Polycarp saw the fiction called the apostles and was instructed by them. Polycarp even knew people who saw Jesus. Total fiction.

But, another early church father was aware of the fiction called Polycarp. This writer somehow managed to write to Polycarp about matters pertaining to the church while on his voyage as a prisonner, condemned to die for the same avtivity he was carrying out while on his way to Rome.

This fiction writer was the man from Ephesus called Ignatius.

Who supplied Ignatius with pen, paper and ink while in custody awaiting death in Rome?

Ignatius wrote a letter to a witness of fiction. He wrote a letter to Polycarp.

Ignatius appears to be aware of the Pauline letters but the Pauline letters are backdated fiction, they were written long after Ignatius was supposed to be dead.

Ignatius claimed Paul was martyred, but the matyrdom of Paul was backdated fiction. The matyrdom of Paul was written long after Ignatius was supposed to be dead.

Ignatius ,if he really lived in the 1st century, could not have written such false information and still want people to accept such erroneous information as true.

The information in the letters from Ignatius about Paul, the apostles and Polycarp are from another time zone. Paul, the Acts of the apostles, and Polycarp are backdated fiction.

Ignatius in his letter to the Romans claimed Peter and Paul issued commandments to the Church, but Peter was a never-existed fictitious character. Peter and Paul together in Rome is backdated post ascension fiction. Paul was a fiction writer who lived long after Ignatius was supposed to be dead.

Irenaeus, Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome are backdated post-ascension fiction writers. The fictitious information in those writings were provided by one source.

The Roman Church.

Amaleq13

When one is preaching rather than discussing or defending one's assertions, questions and apparent errors are ignored.