Sheshbazzar

If 'Paul' was all that popular, and had written anything of value, and it was known and 'popular' at that time, it would have been the most powerful weapon available to use against Marcion's doctrine.
That they didn't quote 'Paul's' writings is more than sufficient evidence that they didn't even know of these 'Pauline' writings.
Most likely because they weren't available or popular, because they hadn't even been written yet.

aa5874

You ask me questions that you can't answer!!! Just answer your own questions.

Questions are NOT evidence of anything.

Hippolytus and Ephraim were NOT erased and they did NOT mention that Marcion manipulated the Pauline writings and gLuke.

outhouse

paul was one version of many different directions jesus movement was trying to take off.

in the time of paul oral tradition was king, there were many schools of thought and paul was not in line with what jesus taught. He would not have been well accepted by the early church disciples and its why he distanced himself from THEIR movement. At that time the early church disciples were still preaching jesus true movement, not the romanized version paul spewed out.

because pauls version took off to gentiles, after the fall of the temple many jews were looking for a new religion as well. Before the temple fell the hard working jew was very dissatisfied with how the romans infected their temple and the Sadducees were not looked upon highly at all, there would have been a great deal of hatred to them for helping the romans.

Paul being a henchmen for the Sadducees could not claim his real position in my opinion, and I dont trust him as far as could throw him.




They didnt quote pauls writings because they had no issue with paul, they had a issue with the direction Marcion took his religion.


Like it or not the content of pauls letters, not in dispute were written before the fall of the temple.

outhouse

gluke was written long after pauls letters were penned.

Like the other gospels that existed in oral tradition for decades, different communities had different beliefs and wrote different things to the core stories floating around.

Gmark is dated correctly, and Gluke is as well. Paul was obviously before these gospels and the letters content matches the history perfectly.

aa5874

You are a story-teller. By the way, Paul claimed he was a Pharisee.

If what you say represents the Consensus then we might as well start going to Sunday School to get history lesson.

You remind me of Constantine in "Church History".

You don't seem to need any evidence for your claims about Paul.

aa5874

Where is your supporting evidence from antiquity? Don't you uderstand that I cannot accept the NT as a credible source WITHOUT corroborative evidence?

It is the NT that is under investigation.

Again, NO author of the NT used a single passage from the Pauline writings.

ALL the authors including Paul was INFLUENCED by gMark.

Word-for-Word copying is a Fundamental sign that an author is aware of an earlier writing.

One author COPIED virtually all of gMark WORD-FOR-WORD and NOT a word from Paul.

Please Examine the Short-Ending gMark, the Long-Ending gMark and gMatthew.

It virtually CERTAIN that gMark was BEFORE all the books of the NT Canon and the Pauline writings are LAST to be composed.

Sheshbazzar

You already said it.

Toto

I don't understand your point. Marcion had his collection of Paul's alleged letters. The anti-Marcionites accused Marcion of cutting things out of Paul's letters, and produced their own version. So they did quote Paul's letters against Marcion, although some people suspect that they actually wrote the stuff they quoted against him.

Robert M. Price will be coming out soon with his book, Paul the Colossal Apostle. I hope he solves this problem....

Sheshbazzar

We really don't know what Marcion had. We don't have a single text that originated with Marcion.
And there is not one text written by the christian church that can be trusted to be telling the truth about anything.
Some people also suspect that 'Marcion' was a church fabricated foil, an inflamatory literary device employed to put their propaganda into circulation.

Toto

Who are these people?