Johnny Skeptic

I am referring to writings by second century church fathers.

As an example, regarding the claim that Papias was a hearer of John, which John, and what evidence is the claim based on?

andrewcriddle

See papias

Ireneus claims in Against Heresies Book 5 Andrew Criddle

aa5874

There seemed to be some kind of mix-up. Eusebius in Church History, when writing about the Johns of Papias, admitted that there were two persons named John and that their authorship may be problematic.

"Church History" 3.39.6 Now, it should be noted that the John in Revelation did not write that he was a disciple of Jesus Christ while he was on earth, and the author of the Gospel according to John is not really known.

But it is even more interesting to note that the Gospel according to John may have been written well after Revelations.

The Gospel according to John does not have any informtion about the apocalypse that would come shortly. All the Synoptics claimed there was an impending conflagration except gJohn. It appears that gJohn was written after the prophecy was deemed a failure.

These are the very first and last verses of Revelations.
Revelation 1:1 - Revelation 22:20-21 -

mountainman

I think they got their information from the very first imperially sponsored "Christian History Research Fellow" in the form of the fourth century fabricator Eusebius.

Clivedurdle

Or different traditions had completely different tales of Jesus.

andrewcriddle

It is not clear whether Eusebius is reliable about two Johns, both Christian leaders in Ephesus. However it seems correct and important that Papias himself did not claim that the John he knew wrote what we call the Gospel of John.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

But, it must be noted that it is the very unreliable Eusebius who tells us about Papias.

Eusebius did tell us about a letter that Jesus wrote.

Steven Carr

But it's not like he posted it on the Internet.

Anybody who posted a letter on the Internet that Jesus allegedly wrote would be dismissed by scholars as a 'crank' and never taken seriously again. Or at least they would double-check all of the guy's claims very carefully after that.

But Eusebius wrote it in a book, not on a blog, so he is not a crank, and Biblical scholars take him seriously.

mountainman

Steven Carr has your lateral thinking mind taken a hike? The goods were posted in the most lavish high-technology available to the upper classes of the early to mid 4th century. We may call it "The Constantine Codex", or "The Constantine Bible" or "Constantine's Grape Vine" or "The New Boss's New Message to the old Greek Civilisation of the old Roman Empire". Constantine had all the communication channels monopolised and sewn up in his supreme power as a fascist "Pontifex Maximus".




The Greeks knew it was a bag of baloney.
The Greek knew they were looking at a 4th century Tolkien.
The Greeks all rightfully suspected that Harry Jesus Potter was fabricated by the Boss in his own studios and scriptoria!
The Boss (Constantine) operated the equivalent of all the internet servers Steven Carr.

Hence we find trace of the reactionary five sophsims of Arius of Alexandria:

There was time when He was not.
Before He was born He was not.
He was made out of nothing existing.
He is/was from another subsistence/substance.
He is subject to alteration or change.

Constantine instructed Eusebius (as Editor-In-Chief) to order scribes to write it in a codex - the high Greek technology of the preservation of written Greek literature. Constantine then burnt other competetor's high technology codices, low technology scrolls and ordered their libraries destroyed and "prohibited for business-as-usual". There was a mass redundancy of all competitors. The Christian Domain Name was REGISTERED with a DOT COM and the sword.

Constantine at Nicaea then instructed with much gravitas all Biblical scholars to take him very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very seriously and attempted to have his Codex canonised by the remnants of the Greek priesthood of Alexandria and the East - the "Sacred College of the Pontifices" who had provided august (Greek) advice in many matters to the Roman emperors since the epoch BCE. Constantine was so successful with this instruction that no self-respecting Biblical scholar has seriously questioned Constantine's and Eusebius' integrity ever since.

Toto

Pete: please adjust your sarcasm detector.

IF YOU QUOTE THIS SECTION OUT OF CONTEXT AGAIN I WILL REMOVE IT FROM THE THREAD. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND YOU ARE MISUSING THIS SITE TO SPREAD YOUR MISUNDERSTANDING AROUND THE INTERNET.

Got it?