outhouse

I knew you'd like it brother aa

aa5874

Let me review the FACTS.

It is claimed in "Against Heresies" 2.22 that Jesus was crucified when he was about 50 years of age and that John, the other disciples and the elders did convey that information to people of antiquity.

It simply cannot be that a Presbyter and Bishop of the Church could have known of gLuke, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings and still argue that Jesus was crucified at about fifty years of age.

"Against Heresies"2.22 must be or is most likely before the Pauline letters.

It is also claimed that a Bishop called Clement of Rome was aware of Paul and the Pauline letters to the Corinthians but upon investigation it is found that NOT even the Church and its writers can properly accout for Clement as a Bishop of Rome.

The chronology for the succession of Bishops of Rome shows UTTER confusion--some apologetic say Clement was bishop at c 68 CE, others c 78 and some c 90 CE.

There was simply no succession of Bishops as stated in apologetic sources up to at least the end of the 2nd century.

The history of the Church as stated by the Church writers is bogus--there wasNO Jesus, NO Paul and No Bishops in the 1st century.

outhouse

written way to late to be of any real value towards jesus or paul.


why would they?? they were written out of history by romans hellenizing the legends.


paul took the movement and uprooted it and popularized the legend beyond what the early disciples had accomplished. This popularity of paul buried jesus original message and that of his followers.


False

and all the evidence points to a early date.


again, no one with credibility debates this.



or many other people of that time period.

but there was a money issue in Corinth


small unorganized movement at that time, what do you want, history on a plate???




hard to write about something in a state of evolution dont you think???


false again.


plenty of people named yeshua lived then.


False

there was a Saul who wrote epistles



At the end of the first century the churches were just forming, a lack of organization on their part does not mean they didnt exist.

outhouse

Great!!!!!!


when are you going to start????


I would love to see something better then what amounts to conspiracy theories not followed by mainstream scholarships

aa5874

You don't seem to even know what facts are. You must first understand what facts are.

Is NOT a fact that it is claimed in "Against Heresies" 2.22 that Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old?

Is it NOT a fact that it is claimed in "Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching" that Jesus was crucified under Claudius the Emperor?

Is it NOT a fact that it is claimed in gLuke 3.1 that Jesus was about to be 30 year old when he was baptized by John in the 15th year of Tiberius?

Is NOT a fact that it is claimed in gJohn 18.24 that Jesus was crucified when Caiaphas was High Priest?

From those FACTS we can logically deduce or infer that the author of "Against Heresies" 2.22 was NOT aware that the Gospels themselves show that Jesus could NOT have been 50 years old at crucifixion if he was 30 years old in the 15th year of Tiberius when Pilate was governor and Caiaphas was High Priest.

You MUST first understand the FACTS.

The Emperor Tiberius died c 37 CE.

Pilate was governor 27-37 CE.

Caiaphas was High Priest 18-36 CE.

Look at the Facts. The supposed Jesus of the Gospels could NOT have been more than 37-38 years of age if he was curcified when Caiaphas was High Priest, Pilate was governor and Tiberius was Emperor.

"Against Heresies" is a massive forgery with more than one author.

outhouse

is to new to be used as a tool for recontructing HJ

Sheshbazzar

But the very fact that it is 'too new' indicates that at that late date even this church writer was still unfamiliar with the accounts as given in these Gospels, else he would not have presented the Crucifixion as having taken place at age 50.
By 180 CE the approximate time of 'Adverses Heresies' publication, Irenaeus should have been well aware of the contents of the Gospels of St Luke and St John__IF they were available to the church.

outhouse

its not a late date and there were many different circles at that time

the early church had no real canon at that time and n organization what so ever.

Sheshbazzar

Missing the point. It was 180 CE and this church writer shows he is not familiar with the contents of the Gospels of St Luke and St John. 'different circles' don't excuse or explain it. Irenaeus was a Church Father and a mouthpiece for the Church.

And damn few Christians would allow that the church and canon was so disorganized that even these most basic of Christian Gospels would not have been well established and well known by 180 CE.
Something there stinks to high heaven.

aa5874

Well, you have EXPOSED that "Against Heresies" is a bogus document and was NOT written in the 2nd century.

There was NO such thing as a Catholic church with one and the same faith throughout the world.

"Against Heresies" 1 Irenaeus did NOT even know that it was an Heresy to claim Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old.