spamandham

That would be true, had I attacked you, but I didn't. You asked me to solve a problem for you that you yourself have created, and I pointed out that it's your problem, not mine.

Somehow that's a personal attack?

Solitary Man

Oh, please.

Amaleq13

OK, kids, enough with the bickering or I'm pulling the car over. Please refocus on the thread topic.

Thanks,


Doug aka Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

aa5874

Well, Justin Martyr himself will tell you, clearly, that there were other people called Christians who were followers of Simon, the Magician of Gitto, Meander the Magician of Capparetaea and Jesus the Phantom , son of another God (not the God of the Jews), during the reign of Claudius Caesar and upto 150 CE.


First Apology XXVI
Justin Martyr has spoken, his words are very clear, a "Christian" can be the follower of magicians or a phantom who was not even regarded as the son of the god of the Jews.

Ben C Smith

Yes, and they claimed (according to Justin and others) to be followers of Christ. That is why they were Christians. The connection of Simon Magus to the crucifixion is palpable, and is one of his distinguishing marks; Marcion did not deny the crucifixion, though of course he interpreted it differently than Justin did.

None of this supports the notion that I was calling into question, namely that people rejected the Christ story for being fiction instead of, for example, for glorifying a crucified man.

And let those who are not found living as he taught, be understood to be no Christians, even though they profess with the lip the precepts of Christ.

Ben.

aa5874

No, they were not followers of the Christ, the son of the God of the Jews, some believed in some other Christ, the son of some other God who was greater than the god of the Jews and others believed that Simon and Meander were gods and believed they were also Christ, themselves.

And Simon was called a god and honoured as a god because of his magic, according to Justin, not because of any "palpable connection to a crucifixion".



This is your original post I pointed out to you that Justin Martyr never referred to Saul or Paul, it appears that "Paul" may be a fabrication after Justin, and Tacitus never mentioned any crucifixion or any Jesus in Annals.

Well, that is exacthly the point, according to Justin Martyr, many persons were calling themselves Christians and they were not followers of Jesus of Nazareth, they were followers of magicians, and these Christians of the magician sects predated even Nero.

At one time, almost all Samaritans were called Christians, followers of the Magician Simon, the first God, during the days of Claudius Caesar.

First Apology VI, Justin Martyr

Ben C Smith

There is semantic slippage going on here. When Simon claimed to be Christ, it was no mere philosophical title; he was claiming to have been the one who actually participated in the paradigmatic historical event attributed to Christ.

You have no idea what I am referring to, do you?

I obviously included Paul as early evidence because I, like the vast majority of other informed readers of the texts, think Paul is indeed early evidence. I do not habitually negate fringe theories with every single statement that I make.

If you are merely registering your position, for the record, that Paul is a fabrication that postdates Justin Martyr, have at it. I will not debate the point here.

Again, you apparently have no idea what I am referring to with reference to Simon Magus. According to Irenaeus, Simon Magus claimed that he was the one who was thought to have suffered in Judea. This is similar to modern reincarnation buffs claiming that they were the ones who conquered Napolean at Waterloo or invented the Tesla coil; both betray a belief that something happened historically; they just explain it differently.

But on with your semantic switching....

Ben.

aa5874

Are you claiming that Jesus of Nazareth was a magician like Simon? Justin Martyr is extremely clear, almost all Samaritans considered themselves Christians because they believed Simon the Magician was the first god, not the second or the third, so there would be no paradigmatic historical event for Simon, he is the first god, maybe Jesus of Nazareth came after.

Well, Justin Martyr didn't appear to know about "Saul or Paul" in any of his extant writings and that is a fact, not fringe theory. What you have failed to admit is that Justin Martyr negated "Paul" as early evidence, he just doesn't seem to exist before Justin.

Tesla coil? Is that some kind of a semantic switch?

Ben C Smith

No, I am claiming that Simon claiming Christianity in some form has to do with Simon taking at least part of the story of Christ as a real happening.

This is where you have to get back to the Greek text. The term used for first in the Greek commonly means foremost or most important, not necessarily first in chronological time. The first citizens of a city, for instance, are the most important citizens, not the first ones who ever lived. That Simon is the first god need mean no more than that he is the most important god, similar to calling Yahweh the most high.

What is fact is that Justin does not mention Paul in his extant writings (keep in mind that we are missing his work against Marcion!). What is fringe is that this datum certainly, uncontrovertedly means that Justin did not know about Paul, and that this in turn means Paul postdates Justin.

Yes, Tesla coil.

I once did a report on a San Diego area cult called Unarius, whose members thought they had been reincarnated many times over. One of their leaders claimed to have been Nikola Tesla in a past life, and to have invented the Tesla coil as some necessary element of the Unarius cult (though I forget exactly how the coil is supposed to help when the Space Brothers arrive).

Ben.

Solitary Man

Ben,

It's quite simple. Paul post-dates Justin. But since Justin knows the Gospels, and the Gospels know Paul, Justin must also post-date Justin. This is not fridge fringe theory.