mountainman

The dominant history until recently (a few centuries ago now) was called the history of the church and the figure of Jesus did not feature prominently since the church at that time had the power and the passion. In recent centuries, the historical nature of the church history has become subject to academic examination, leading us to works such as that of "Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus" by Arthur Drews and "Caesar's Messiah" by Joe Atwill. Where is all this leading?

It is leading towards the emergence of a new class of theories concerning the historicity of Jesus in which Jesus emerges as based upon fabrication and fiction. An examination of some of these theories of fiction reveals various vantage points on history.

I have prepared, and will post, a more detailed response to your questions posed in the other thread. But for the moment, I want to stop here and make sure that you understand where I am coming from, and that I understand your position.

Have a look at this diagram:



We see mapped here 1) the HJ theories and the 2) MJ theories. A third segment of the theory space is 3) Ahistorical = fictional, or if you prefer, purely mythical, in which case the Ahistorical = fictional is a subset of this. The HJ theories are mapped into region 1, the MJ theories mainly into region 2, and it is my claim that there is exists a unique segment 3 that represents the possibilities of fiction and fraud.

It is fiction and fraud which I wish to examine and test. When you say:
"False dichotomy. (3) Eusebian history is a mixture of fact and inaccuracies" it appears you are saying that you believe more in a theory from the region marked 2 above, which is part fiction and part history. I am looking at things generally here, in the first instance.

I am aware of the arguments from the HJ crowd in region 1 and the MJ crowd in region 2, and of many of the arguments of the FJ crew in region 3. There is no "false dichotomy" in this presentation. It seems like you are saying to me, you cannot have a postulate in the region 3, the postulate must come from the region 2.

Before I go on to the cast of thousands and Eusebius, can you clarify what you mean by this leading statement of "false dichotomy"?

Thanks, and best wishes


Pete Brown

Ted Hoffman

A false dichotomy is a logical fallacy and it is committed when one claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.

For example, "If today is not Tuesday, it must be Wednesday." Or, closer home:
You have not responded to what I asked you in my last post. If you do not list which documents Eusebius forged against those he did not forge, and how you get to delineate the two, then our discussion is over. Start with the list at earlychristianwritings.com.
Your categorization is based on a defective understanding of the subjects you are attempting to classify. Joe Atwill's Jesus is not the same as Doherty's Jesus. If you cannot understand that then you are not qualified to even draw that venn diagram. You cant just ignore differences and meanings of concepts and do whatever you want.

A myth is not fiction. Fiction is not mythology. Fiction is an imaginative form of narrative while myths are parts of cultures. Fiction is a form of art or entertainment. Myths are not for entertainment and are mostly used to to explain the nature of the universe and humanity and sometimes to bind ethnic groups. Myths are taken to be true by those belonging to the cultural or religious subgroup that embrace the myth (yes, myths trangress cultural boundaries). Fictional tales typically have plotting, character, and place or setting. What is the setting of the Christ myth in Philippians 2:8-11? Who is the antagonist?

Please stop being flippant with this subject. Now please answer my earlier questions. Is Eusebius the author of the Ignatian Epistles? If not, why not?
Did he write Matthew and Mark? What about the editorial fatigue we observe in Matthew?
He wrote Josephus? How can we know it was his (Eusebius') hand? What is his style?
Help us understand please.

mountainman

The AUTHORS of Antiquity

Let's get specific about the source authors. It is our postulate that the Constantinian political regime was corrupt and that christian history which was to be presented as legitimate and authentic, and to be associated with this new top-down-emperor cult, was in fact fabricated by the invention of the authors in category 1, and their respective works. In the first place I will list the four categories of the authors of antiquity that the thesis deals with:

1) The fictional prenicene christians (who babble about things "christian")
2) The historical prenicene "pagans" (who have no knowledge of anything "christian").
3) The historical post-nicene christians
4) The historical post-nicene "pagans" and ascetics

Once I have listed the detailed authors and their respective categories, I will defend the postulate, on the basis that it represents the simplest method to explain the political chaos of the fourth century between the groups 3 and 4, and all known archaeological and/or scientific citations that are present in the field of ancient history.


CATEGORY 1: AHISTORICAL PRENICENE CHRISTIANS

Jesus of Nazareth (0-33), Judas (0-40), Simon Magus (0-50), Jude (0-60), Barnabas (0-61), Paul (20-65), Matthew (0-70), Mark (0-70), Luke (0-70), John (0-70), Peter (0-70), Clement of Rome (18-98), Ignatius of Antioch (40-117), Aristides the Philosopher (70-134), Basilides (120-140), Marcion (130-140), Papias (110-140), Quadratus (70-140), Agrippa Castor (90-145), Aquila of Sinope (of Pontus) (90-150), Aristo of Pella (130-150), Polycarp (110-155), Valentinus (120-160), Epiphanes (130-160), Marcion of Sinope (110-160), Justin Martyr (150-160), Isidore (140-160), Carpocrates of Alexandria (80-160), Minucius Felix (140-170), Melito of Sardis (165-175), Dionysius of Corinth (165-175), Excerpts of Theodotus (150-180), Athenagoras of Athens (175-180), Apelles (160-180), Apollinaris Claudius (120-180), Julius Cassianus (160-180), Hegesippus (110-180), Heracleon (150-180), Ptolemy (140-180), Pinytus of Crete (130-180), Rhodon (175-185), Theophilus of Caesarea (175-185), Tatian (135-185), Theophilus of Antioch (180-185), Irenaeus of Lyons (175-185), Apollonius (136-186), Anonymous Anti-Montanist (193-193), Maximus of Jerusalem (185-195), Polycrates of Ephesus (130-196), Victor I (189-199), Mathetes (130-200), Diognetus (130-200), Clement of Alexandria (182-202), Apollonius (200-210), Pantaenus (190-210), Serapion of Antioch (200-210), Tertullian (197-220), Bardesanes (180-220), Caius (200-220), Hippolytus of Rome (180-230), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Octavius of Minucius Felix (160-250), Alexander (of Cappadocia,Jerusalem) (150-250), Cornelius (of Rome) (200-253), Cyprian of Carthage (200-258), Novatian (201-258), Dionysius (of Alexandria) the Great (200-264), Dionysius of Rome (210-268), Gregory Thaumaturgus (212-275), Paul of Samosata (200-275), Hermias (210-280), Malchion (of Antioch) (220-290), Anatolius of Laodicea in Syria (222-290) Victorinus (bishop) of Petau (240-303), Arnobius (245-305), Phileas (Bishop) of Thmuis (250-307), Pamphilus (250-309), Peter of Alexandria (250-311), Methodius (250-311), Miltiades (Pope 311-314) (270-314)


CATEGORY 2: HISTORICAL PRE-NICENE PAGANS

Gaius Asinius Pollio (-76-5), Nicolaus of Damascus (-65-5), Augustus (-63-14), Livy (Titus Livius) (-59-17), Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso) (-43-17), Herod Archelaus (-23-18), King Juba II (of Lybia) (-52-23), Strabo (-64-24), Aulus Cremutius Cordus (-25-25), Herod of Chalcis (-10-27), Gaius Asinius Pollio (Jnr) (-20-30), Marcus Velleius Paterculus (-19-31), Thrasyllus of Mendes (-36-36), Tiberius (-42-37), Aulus Cornelius Celsus (-20-37), Seneca (the Elder) (-54-39), Pontius Pilate (-10-40), Herod Antipas (-20-40), Ptolemy of Mauretania (-1-40), Caligula (12-41), Agrippa I (Herod Agrippa) (-10-44), Zeno of Sidon (-100-44), Diophantus (-20-44), Gaius Sallustius Passienus Crispus (1-47), Philo-Judaeus (-15-50), Abgar V of Edessa (-4-50), Remmius Palaemon (-10-51), Claudius (-10-54), Lucius Iunius Moderatur Columella (1-60), Persius (Aulus Persius Flaccus) (34-62), Lucan (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus) (39-65), Seneca (the Younger) (-4-65), Thrasea Paetus (20-66), Petronius (27-66), Nero (37-68), Galba (-3-69), Otho (32-69), Vitellus (15-69), Dioscorides (1-70), Cornutus (39-70), Moderatus of Gades (Cadiz, Spain) (0-70), Asconius Pedianus (-9-76), Helvidius Priscus (35-77), Demetrius the Cynic (36-77), Vespasian (9-79), Pliny the Elder (23-79), Quintus Curtius Rufus (10-80), Damis (0-80), Chariton (10-80), Titus (39-81), Memnon of Heraclea (20-90), Mucianus (20-90), Statius (Publius Papinius Statius) (45-96), Domitian (51-96), Nerva (30-98), Apollonius of Tyana (-4-98), Quintilian (Marcus Fabius Quintilia (35-100), Agrippa II (27-100), Musonius Rufus (30-100), Flavius Josephus (37-100), Neilus (son of Theon) (50-100), Silius Italicus (25-101), Martial (40-102), Pliny the Younger (63-113), Juvenal (40-115), Trajan (Marcus Nerva Traianus) (53-117), Tacitus (Cornelius) (56-117 ), Plutarch, Mestrius (46-120), Aelianus Tacticus (50-120), Nicomachus of Gerasa (Jerash, Jorda (60-120), Dio Chrysostom (of Prusa) (40-120), Curtis Rufus, Quintus (70-120), Florus (60-130), Suetonius (70-131), Epictetus (55-135), Secundus (the philosopher) (76-138), Soranus of Ephesus (98-138), Hadrian (Publius Aelius Traianus) (76-138), Ptolemaeus Chennus (60-140), Demonax (70-140), Favorinus (80-150), Aristocles of Messene (100-150), Antoninus Pius (86-161), Appian of Alexandria (95-165), Sextus of Chaeroneia (90-165), Ptolemy (Claudius Ptolemaeus) (90-168), Fronto (Cornelius) (100-170), Junius Rusticus (90-170), Artemidorus (100-170), Avidius Cassius (130-175), Arrian of Nicomedia (92-175), Lucian of Samosata (165-175), Herodes Atticus (101-177), Celsus (178-178), Alciphron (120-180), Aulus Gellius (125-180), Marcus Aurelius (Antoninus) (121-180), Lucius Apuleius (123-180), Thallus (90-180), Pausanias (110-180), Rufus of Ephesus (110-180), Alexander of Cottyaeum (117-181), Aelius Aristides (117-181), Symmachus the Ebionite (110-190), Longus (120-190), Granius Licinianus (120-190), Numenius of Apamea (140-190), Hermas (120-190), Commodus (161-192), Pertinax (126-193), Didius Julianus (133-193), Pescennius Niger (140-194), Sextus Pompeius Festus (120-195), Clodius Albinus (150-197), Alexander of Aphrodisias (120-199), Phlegon (99-199), Mara Bar Serapion (073-200), Julian the Theurgist (160-210), Septimius Severus (146-211), Geta (189-211), Abercius (193-216), Galen (Claudius Galenus) (129-216), Talmud (188-217), Caracalla (186-217), Macrinus (165-218), Diadumenian (190-218), Philostratus (200-220), Athenaeus of Naucratis (160-220), Elagabalus (203-222), Dio Cassius (165-230), Marius Maximus (160-230), Claudius Aelianus (175-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Maximinus Thrax (173-238), Gordian I (159-238), Pupienus (178-238), Balbinus (165-238), Gordian II (192-238), Philip II (Philippus II) (238-239), Sextus Empiricus (170-240), Xenophon of Ephesus (170-240), Herodian of Syria (170-240), Gordian III (225-244), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Pacatian (Pacatianus) (200-248), Jotapian (Jotapianus) (200-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Julius Africanus (170-250), Babrius (-250-250), Decius Trajan (201-251), Decius (201-251), Herennius Etruscus (227-251), Hostilian (233-251), Trebonianus Gallus (206-253), Aemilianus (207-253), Volusianus (200-253), Uranius (200-254), Origen (185-254), Diogenes Laertius (190-260), Valerian (200-260), Gallienus (218-268), Plotinus (205-270), Asinius Quadratus (200-270), Claudius II (213-270), Quintillus (225-270), Longinus, Cassius Dionysius (213-273), Aurelian (214-275), Tacitus (Marcus Claudius) (200-276), Mani the Prophet (210-276), Florianus (200-276), Heliodorus of Emesa (220-280), Probus (232-282), Carus (230-283), Carinus (240-285), Junianus Justinus (220-290), Carausius (240-293), Allectus (245-296), Diophantus of Alexandria (200-298), Porphyry (234-305), Constantius Chlorus (250-306), Asclepiodotus (250-310), Galerius (250-311), Diocletian (236-316), Hierocles (270-324), Iamblichus of Chalcis (245-325), Amoun (250-325)


CATEGORY 3: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century CHRISTIANS

Lactantius (240-320), Alexander of Alexandria (260-326), Sabinus (270-330), Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea (265-340), Commodianus (270-350), Alexander of Lycopolis (280-350), Maximin of Trier (346-352), Donatus Magnus (311-355), Anthony the Great (251-356), Aphrahat/Aphraates (280-367), Hilary of Poitiers (300-368), Athanasius (296-373), Ephraim the Syrian (306-373), Basil the Great (329-379), Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386), Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389), Apollinaris (the Younger) (330-390), Acacius (320-390), Eunomius of Cyzicus (323-393), Gregory of Nyssa (335-395), Philastrius or Philaster of Brescia (345-396), Ambrose (340-397), Didymus the Blind (313-398), Damasus of Rome (320-400), Epiphanius of Salamis (310-403), Sulpicius Severus (363-406), John Chrysostom (347-407), Rufinus (340-410), Theophilus of Alexandria (345-412), Jerome (331-420), Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Philip of Side (380-431), John Cassian (360-435), Philostorgius (368-439), Cyril of Alexandria (378-444), Sozomen (400-450), Socrates Scholasticus (379-450), Vincent of Lérins (390-450), Theodosius II (401-450), Nestorius of Constantinople (386-451), Theodoret (393-457), Leo the Great, Pope (395-461), Hydatius (400-469), Gennadius of Marseilles (440-496)

CATEGORY 4: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century PAGANS

Crispus (299-326), Palamon (270-330), Sopater of Apamea (270-335), Arius of Alexandria (270-336), Constantine I (272-337), Constantine II (316-340), Asterius the Sophist (281-341), Pachomius (292-346), Constans (320-350), Lucius Ampelius (100-350), Magnentius (303-353), Constantius II (317-361), Julian (331-363), Jovian (332-364), Aëtius of Antioch (307-367), Anonymous Scriptores (4?) (312-370), Sallustius (300-370), Marcellus of Ancyra (300-374), Valentinian I (321-375), Pambo (304-375), Valens (328-378), Prohaeresius (300-380), Gratian (359-383), Himerius (315-386), Themistus (317-387), Festus (Rufius?) (320-390), Macarius the Egyptian (300-390), Origen the Priest (associate of "Th (324-390), Eutropius (320-390), Sextus Aurelius Victor (320-390), Macarius the Alexandrian (293-393), Libanius (314-394), Nichomachus Flavianus (344-394), Decimus Magnus Ausonius (310-395), Theodosius I (346-395), Ammianus Marcellinus (325-399), Evagrius Ponticus (345-399), Isodore the Ascetic (318-400), Gelasius of Caesarea (365-400), Oribasius (320-400), Quintus Aurelius Symmachus (340-402), Ammonius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-402), Discorus (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-403), Claudian (350-404), Arcadius (377-408), Melania the Elder (341-410), Paphnutius of Scetis (312-412), Synesius (373-414), Eunapius (347-414), Hypatia of Alexandria (370-415), Euthymius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Eusebius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Amma Talis (320-420), Isaac of Scetis (350-420), Palladius of Galatia (363-425), Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius (360-430), Plutarch (the Younger) (350-433), Gelasius of Cyzicus (420-475), Stobaeus (420-480), Proclus, Lycaeus (412-487), Moses of Chorene (400-490).

spamandham

Good lord mountainman! If we award points for volume, you win hands down on this one!

This question will sound stupid, because, well, it is. Regardless, here goes:

What is the earliest Christian artifact dated using radiometric or other 'solid' nontextual techniques?

mountainman

This diagram seeks to define the theory space of ideas and conceptions about the figure of Jesus. This term theory space has a specific meaning which you may not be familiar with.


The thesis is not about myth. It is about fiction. The fraudulent misrepresentation of history by fictional stories published under the political regime of Constantine I.

08. And being found in fashion as a man,
he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death,
even the death of the cross.

09. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him,
and given him a name which is above every name.

10. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
of things in heaven, and things in earth,
and things under the earth;

11. And that every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

The antagonist is Constantine against the ancient conceptions of the Logos and the pantheon of the Hellenic concepts of god in the fourth century, as is expressed by the surviving Nag Hammadi tractates dedicated to the memory of Hermes and of Asclepius.

The name of Jesus Christ is a fourth century Constantinian invention which the Boss pushed on to his empire as a literary program of "harmonisation" designed to create a more monotheistic culture, less collegiate, less tolerance and more amenable to the authority of the Boss. The ancient authority (which he had to legislate against) was the pagan ascetic priesthoods --- these he dismantled by prohibiting temple services with effect from 324 CE. They went to the deserts of Egypt under Pachomius et al - there was no place for them anymore in the empire.

Philippians 2:8-11 is Constantinian POLEMIC.
His new God was the Number One El Supremo.
People would soon get used to the emperor-cult.


The NT books were prepared by Eusebius as editor-in-chief.
Perhaps Pamphilus was coreced to write bits and pieces before
he refused Constantine one time too many?


He interpolated Josephus in at least 2 places.
Kerry Shirts and others implicate him specifically with
the fourth century authorship of the interpolation
known as the TF.

All other pagans in category 2, who are purported to mention "christianity" have been interpolated or forged. The top bunch of these are:


Josephus Flavius - The Testimonium Flavianum, Antiquity of the Jews
Tacitus - Annals 15:44, 15th Century Forgery of Poggio Bracciolini
Suetonius - Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Nero, 16.
Pliny the Younger - Plinius, Ep 10:97; a letter to the Roman Emperor Trajan
Emperor Trajan - Dear Pliny (a rescript)
Marcus Aurelius - The "christian" reference at Meditations 11:3
Hegesippus - The "shadowy Hegesippus" according to Momigliano
Celsus: Fourth Century Eusebian forgery of anti-christian writings
Julius Africanus - Chronologer used by Eusebius, whom Eusebius "corrects" by 300 years.
Lucian of Samosata - Life of Peregrine, Alexander the Prophet
The Vienne/Lyon Martyrs' Letter - Independent analysis of Eusebian forgery.
Origen - Ascetic pythagorean academic; specialist of the (LXX) Hebrew Bible (alone).
Porphyry - Ascetic pythagorean academic; Eusebian forgery of anti-christian writings.

Who did you want to start with?


NOTE: that the Tacitus interpolation need not have been Eusebius, but in fact a 15th century papal forger.

You need to understand that between EUsebius and the present day there are standing a long list of christian censors and bigots and perverters of the historical truth for the expediency and the authenticity of the One True Universal Church. There are all the christian authors in category 3 to the end of the fifth century, and then there is the intervening thousand years of the suppression and "buisiness and usual" by the church.

This the Tacitus reference need not be explained by Eusebius. In any event, the pagan Tacitus does not know anything at all about this wonderful and fictitious nation of "christians".

This nation was Constantinian polemic and propaganda.
Eusebius is the name usually provided as his minister.
The vast and magnificent nation of the Christians have existence in the Eusebian literature prior to the council of Nicaea, but they have no existence in the earth and archaeology for a good reason: the nation before Rome c.312 CE was entirely fictional.



Best wishes,


Pete Brown
http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/

mountainman

The binding on the Gospel of Judas.
C14 dated to 290 CE (+/- 60 years).

Ted Hoffman

Okay, I am almost giving up Mountainman. I just dont understand this at all. Maybe I am obtuse or you are simply incoherent but I have failed to understand and will not spend any more time on this. Your thesis doesnt make sense and I dont know why we need it or what problem its trying to solve - whatever problems you are attempting to solve, your thesis is itself a problem or you yourself are a liability to the thesis - just look at the questions I ask below. The things you are brushing over casually have been examined for centuries. They are not light matters.

If someone else understands what he is talking about, please help me understand.

If Josephus merely interpolated the TF, it means you believe the rest of Josephan corpus as actual history?

Did the authors exist or not? How do you explain their historical, geographical and theological conflicts? Do you understand what editorial fatigue means? Please read Goodacre's Fatigue in the synoptics.

You place Jesus of Nazareth in Category 1 - which is supposedly, per your cited statement above, a group of authors. Which books did Jesus author?
Apollonius wrote? I thought it was Peregrinus? Which Apollonius? we have three in your list: Apollonius (136-186), Apollonius (200-210) and Apollonius of Tyana (-4-98).

One last question:
Maybe I am asking too many questions. But note that these are my efforts to understand and even accept your thesis. But everytime I ask, your responses open a whole new can of questions while leaving the previous can not fully explained. Let me ask one last question:

Since the gospels were written by the same person, how do you explain the synoptic problem?

mountainman

Thucydides, Philo, and Polybius do not mention christianity.
Josephus was interpolated with a christian reference.
Eusebius did the work at a particulalry shameful hour.
He also interpolated and forged 2 works of Lucian.
Tacitus was interpolated and/or foged in the 15th century.



The word "proof" is not highly regarded in history.
Maybe in mathematics or logic.
History requires the greatest consistency with the evidence.


See the categories 1 to 4.



Are you under the impression that a postulate requires proof?
The postulate is either consistent or inconsistent with the data.
You have not demonstrated knowledge in this area yet.
You have simply demanded "proof".

Where is the "proof" for the hypothesis of the HJ?
Yes, that's right - it does not exist either Ted.
Are you going to take a piece out of mainstream theory too?

The hypothesis of ther HJ does not have a great consistency
to any evidence outside of Eusebius. Arthur Drews has established
that we have no first or early second century witnesses to his historicity.

My hpothesis, that we can explain all this bullshit with a 4th century
utterly corrupt political situation with forgery and fraud is consistent
with the fact that no evidence exists in any prior century. It does not
take a great deal of faith to understand Constantine was a despot. We
have ample evidence of this.



I rule out things by their chronology.
That means historical time period.
Mainstream are playing in a sandpit a few centuries wide.
They have been given latitude long enough.
It is not sufficient to examine the HJ.

We have a postulate that the HJ was a 4th century fiction.
We have no evidence to reject this postulate.
The utter shit-fight between the authors in category 3 and 4
after the military supremacy summit of Nicaea has its own
evidence to contribute.

We have presented evidence that some authors wrote of firm belief
that the NT was fiction, and we are at liberty to interpret Arius
and the words of Arius as historical comments.

We have presented the evidence of fiction as being associated with
the NT from the works of Nestorius. And we have presented evidence
that the apocryphal NT literature is very simply explicated as
a pagan seditionary polemic and reaction to the canon of the Boss.

Where are the similar global theories with mainstream?
Who has explained the apocrypha consistently?

Why does Jesus leave no footprints?
Why is Jesus a slave master?
Why does Jesus appear and disappear as a child?
Why do christian angels masacre Jewish priests?
Why are there mass conversions after such executions?

The Eusebian fiction postulate provides a global explanation
for the entire christian NT corpus. It may not be to the liking
of the mainstream, or the christians, but it may nevertheless
be capable of affording a true account of ancient history.

At present is appears consistent with the evidence.
I will be persuaded by evidence, not rhetoric and
arguments from some perceived authority.

mountainman

Josephus lived and breathed and wrote polemic.
He did not mention JC.



Eusebian fiction postulate:
Every person in cat 1 was bullshit.



He wrote a letter back to Agbar according to Eusebius.
In my book I treat this as being an author of a letter.
A fraudulent letter.



Notably all the people in cat 1 were mentioned by Eusebius.


My main claim is that these are just 4 fictional eyewitness
accounts. The operative word being fiction. Like a superman
comic, and if people want to take the analysis of this seriously
then that is their problem. Trash is trash.

Alternatively, it is just as likely that the Eusebian canon tables were
written first based upon an extant listing of over 600 events
and sayings. Four scribes were then given the list of sayings
and the appropriate instructions as they are now pesent in the
Eusebian canon tables, to prepare each gospel.

The Eusebian canon tables were thus used to construct the
4 gospels, trather than being a byproduct of their analysis.

Ted Hoffman

Thanks for your responses. I am encouraged.
Is this the method then? Any text that mentions Christianity has Eusebius behind it either as a forger or interpolator. Is that your criterion?
How do you know it was not interpolated in the thirteenth century or the seventeenth one?
Why dont you simply call it a claim - instead of hiding under the word "postulate"? So, when do you want it to move from being a postulate to being a hypothesis?
And if its a mere claim that you are not willing to support, why start so many threads about it? And why are you also calling it a hypothesis at the same time? You dont seem to know the difference.
Why four? How do you explain the conflicts if the ideas therein were from the same mind?
If the conflicts are introduced purposefully (as you should claim), what is the purpose?
Why have four gospels?
What do you mean by "trash"? Fiction is not trash. Myths are not trash. Each of them have a purpose and using the word trash to characterize the texts may be taken to indicate that you are not fit for this job.
What events? What are these Eusebian canon tables?
The letter must first exist before it can be a forgery. If it does not exist, you cannot comment on its authenticity. It makes mose sense to argue that Eusebius made a false claim, rather than making pronouncements on something that does not exist. Its like saying there is a fraudulent dragon in my house.
Again, false dichotomy plus argument from ignorance. Please take some time and read logic.
A despot is not evidence of responsibility for forgery. Stop attacking irrelevant issues.