mountainman

From the future.

mountainman

Ah yes, the dogma of the Latin writing heresiologist from North Africa is the source for many early christian Greek textual mysteries. Are you joking? Some people question whether he was a real person.


Definitely. You should also attempt to deal with the Platonic "Holy Trinity" as expressed by Plotinus in the Enneads. It was the Plotinic concept of the Platonic trinity which was misappropriated by the post Nicaean christian heresiologists. The Christian trinity was about monotheistic deity whereas the Platonic Trinity concerned the apperception of a nondual deity.


The Christian trinity was just another 4th century robbery from Pagan (Plato's) philosophy.

MrMacSon

Another dodgy character / church "father" ??!!

Duvduv

Well, if the Trinity emerged after Justin, and even the Nicene Creed dated to 325 didn't identify the doctrine of the Trinity, then Justin was simply referring to the three separate elements of his belief in an order of the Father then his son and the Holy Spirit.
And that doesn't necessarily contradict the way the Creed has it because in Trypho 61 he writes (if he even wrote it ) that the Son is begotten of the Father.

Duvduv

And Justin compares the logos son issuing from the Father the way light issues from the sun, which is not unlike the Creed dated by Eusebius to 325.

aa5874

Please, take note of what I wrote--I can NOW say that there was NO Jesus, NO Apostles and NO Paul in the 1st century before c 70 CE.

Based on Justin Martyr there were people who did NOT believe the Jesus story that were called Christians and lo and behold we have writings attributed to Theophilus of Antioch and Athenagoras who called themselves Christians but did NOT believe in or write about Jesus Christ, did NOT claim Jesus was their Savior and did NOT ask any one to believe in Jesus Christ in their writings.

I do NOT hold the opinion that ALL apologetic sources were manipulated because after having read writings attributed to Justin Marytr, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Tatian and Municius Felix, Aristides, and Arnobius it is clear that those writings have ZERO about the Four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline letters.

No Text of antiquity dated by Paleography or scientific means have corroborated that there were FOUR named Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline letters in the 1st century and before c 70 CE.

That is PRECISELY what I expected.

I consider that sources which did NOT mention the FOUR named Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are CREDIBLE sources and they indeed support the claim that there were NO Apostles, NO Paul and that Jesus was a Myth character.

I have found that virtually every source which mentions the character Paul as a figure of history has credibility problems.

Acts of the Apostles, the very Pauline writings, 1st Clement, the Ignatius letters, the Seneca/Paul letters, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome and others all have serious credibility problems or that their claims about the post-ascension activities of the Apostles and Paul have NOT ever been corroborated by any text DATED by Paleography or scientific means.

Toto

No one except mountainman seriously questions the existence of Tertullian.

Duvduv

I don't follow the logic. The same people who wrote about Tertullian wrote about Jesus and Paul.There is no problem to question anything claimed by the church propagandists.
No one knows anything about Irenaeus but his existence must also be accepted unquestionably. And if one does question, then he becomes an outcast. Very church-like.

Sheshbazzar

Quite possible.

However, what I was intending to to draw attention to is the fact that Justin writing 156 CE was only some 126 years after the alleged crucifixion and ascension of Jezus, -(whom after all, was what his religion was supposed to be all about)-
That is, only approximately two generations after these fantastic events allegedly took place.

So there was no long chain of transmission involved. One (or more) 'credible' eyewitness present at the beginning, and maybe 'two generations' tops up to the time of Justin's adult writings.

So where in this very short chain of transmission of the tradition did all of the noncredible elements of Justin's recorded religious beliefs sneak in?

Was the gospel story credible or uncredible from its first 'eyewitness' reporter? Second (repeater) reporter? Third?

if uncredible at any point in this short line, how then could it have became credible, or make Justin into a 'fundamentally credible' witness for that story?

But, yes Pete, I tend to agree with your suggested direction of much of that 'chain of transmission' as being the far more likely.

Duvduv

The mention of Christians in the story of Proteus makes absolutely no sense. As I mentioned, WHAT Christians and WHERE in Palestine, and they worship WHICH man?
And they have WHAT queer creed? WHICH Asiatic communities? They started worshiping Proteus instead of "the man" they usually worshipped? And "the man" introduced WHICH novel rites? And as "leader" of the Christians, he finished his satirical biography by committing suicide. Now THAT's real "evidence" for early Christians!

It was now that he came across the priests and scribes of the 11 Christians, in Palestine, and picked up their queer creed. I can tell you, he pretty soon convinced them of his superiority; prophet, elder, ruler of the Synagogue--he was everything at once; expounded their books, commented on them, wrote books himself. They took him for a God, accepted his laws, and declared him their president. The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day,--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.

Well, the end of it was that Proteus was arrested and thrown12 into prison. This was the very thing to lend an air to his favourite arts of clap-trap and wonder-working; he was now a made man. The Christians took it all very seriously: he was no sooner in prison, than they began trying every means to get him out again,--but without success. Everything else that could be done for him they most devoutly did. They thought of nothing else. Orphans and ancient widows might be seen hanging about the prison from break of day. Their officials bribed the gaolers to let them sleep inside with him. Elegant dinners were conveyed in; their sacred writings were read; and our old friend Peregrine (as he was still called in those days) became for them "the modern Socrates." In some of the Asiatic 13 cities, too, the Christian communities put themselves to the expense of sending deputations, with offers of sympathy, assistance,