aa5874

In "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus it is claimed there was a Great dissension of the Church of Corinth and that Clement of Rome was the bishop of Rome at that time.

"Against Heresies" 3.3.3 Now, once there was a Great dissension in the Church at Corinth at a specific time period there can be NO mistake as to when the event occurred and who was the Bishop of Rome.

It would be virtually impossible for some to claim that Clement was bishop during the reign of NERO while others say it happened 25 years later during the reign of Domitian.

Well, this is EXACTLY what happened.

In "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus Clement of Rome was Bishop at around 90 CE being the 4th Bishop and in "Prescription Against Heresies" attributed to Tertullian Clement of Rome was Bishop at around 66 CE or the 2nd Bishop.

"Against Heresies" 3.3.3The Prescription Against Heretics 32 Clement of Rome and the Clement letter to the Corinthians were fabricated by the Roman Church.

andrewcriddle

There is a discussion here Clement IMHO the idea that Clement was ordained by Peter is a development of the earlier idea that Clement knew and worked with Peter in the church at Rome in the time of Nero.

(There is nothing particularly implausible with Clement being a church worker in Rome in the 60's and leader of the Roman church in the 90's.)

Andrew Criddle

tanya

Thank you for the link to New Advent, Andrew.

Yes, I agree with your conclusion that Clement of Rome could have been living in Rome in the 60's, and could have been the fourth pope in the 90's.

The question is, how can one accept such a scenario, based upon evidence which is acknowledged by all, to demonstrate "...great variety"?

The first century data is simply unreliable, or, non-existent. The second century data is in dispute, but chronologically suspect (Jesus aged 50 at the time of his death, according to Irenaeus). The third century data remains contradictory: it appears, to me, that some potentially credible text emerges only with debut of the fourth century, by which time, writings of the early centuries are hopelessly mired in disputed, mangled, redacted, and interpolated copies of copies of texts.

What is quite amazing, is that a nascent religious movement, derived, ostensibly, from a semitic tradition which demands literary support to acknowledge various doctrines, should utterly fail to leave for future generations, an unequivocal history. No coins, no monuments, no statues, and no writing. It is almost as if, there had been no new religious movement in the first century.

Even more challenging: no contemporary author describes the activities of these early "popes", living in Rome.
To place this phenomenon in perspective, one requires an answer to this question: Are there any documents, still extant today, which describe in detail, the activities of senior leaders of the Roman government, in the first century? Is it possible, in other words, that we possess today, no reliable information, of any kind, about Rome and its inhabitants, during the first and second centuries, CE?

Do we have texts, or coins, or statues, or buildings, from any religious movement of the first century, based in Rome? Maybe the silence of the Christians is echoed by an absence of all other social interaction in that city, during the first century?

aa5874

No, No, No, Andrew. This is an EXTREMELY serious matter.

I find your comment to rather absurd and dismissive based on the fact that you are FAMILIAR with OTHER evidence that DESTROYS your claim.

The author of "Prescription Against Heretics" is NOT at all claiming that Clement merely worked with Peter, the author STATED that Clement was ORDAINED Bishop by Peter based on the REGISTER of the Church of Rome.


'Prescription Against Heretics 32 The author of Prescription Against Heretics has STATED that the RECORDS of the Apostolic CHURCHES show Clement was ORDAINED by Peter.

Where did the author of "Against Heresies" get his information from? What RECORDS did he use?

Examine "Against Heresies" 3.3.2-3 Incredibly both WRITERS supposedly have RECORDS from the Roman Church with a 25 year discrepancy.

But, the 25 year difference also COMPLETELY destroys the chronology of the other Bishops of Rome BEFORE and AFTER Clement.

The EVIDENCE has indicated that the Roman Church has FABRICATED at least THREE Bishops of Rome, that is, Clement, Linus and Anacletus.

aa5874

Andrew knows that the question is when Clement was Bishop of Rome.

One must remember that all the documents should have been Publicly circulated and Known by people in the Roman Empire.

So, when it is claimed that Clement was the FOURTH Bishop of Rome in "Against Heresies" it should have known by the people all over the Roman Empire, including Christian and Non-Christian, apologetics and Heretics.

When it is claimed that there was a Great Dissension in the Church of Corinth, it should have been known by people in Corinth.

There can be no mistake whatsoever of 25 years.

But, Tertullian claimed the Roman Church REGISTERS show that Clement was ORDAINED by Peter.

The Roman Public, people of Corinth, Christian and non-Christian, apologetics and Heretics should have seen the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian with the 25 year difference.

When then did the GREAT DISSENSION occur in Corinth?

It is clear we have a FABRICATED Clement and Dissension of the Church of Corinth.

Duvduv

I personally think it's safe to say that Against Heresies was not written in the mid-2nd century. Virtually nothing is known about "Irenaeus", and I find it highly unlikely that a book about heresies against an "official church" would have existed that early before there was a monolitihic centralized church.

Now, about Clement of Rome, how do we understand the authorship of the Apostoli Petri, Homilies/Romances etc. that are attributed to him, but which between the lines may preserve some old information about the emerging Christ movements??

aa5874

"Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus is a product of MORE than one author.

The author of "Against Heresies" 2.22 claimed Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old and did NOT know of Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings where PAUL preached Christ CRUCIFIED BEFORE the reign of Claudius and since the time of King Aretas 37-40 CE.

"Against Heresies" is a compilation of Fraud and forgeries with more than one author.

It would have been virtually impossible for Church writers to have made a 25 year mistake with Clement of Rome when he appears to have been mentioned in supposed PUBLICLY circulated writings attributed to Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Jerome, Augustine of Hippo, Rufinus, Saint Optatus and in "Apostolic Constitutions.

1. Ignatius Claimed Clement was the SECOND Bishop or AFTER Linus.

If Clement was the Second Bishop after Linus when did the Great Dissension occur at Corinth?

2. Irenaeus Claimed Clement was the THIRD Bishop or AFTER Linus and Anacletus.

If Clement was the THIRD Bishop AFTER Linus and Anacletus when did the Great Dissension happen in Corinth??

3. Tertullian Claimed Clement was the FIRST Bishop after the Apostle Peter.

If Clement was the First Bishop AFTER the apostle Peter, when was the Great Dissension in Corinth??

All Church writers that mentioned the Epistle from the Church of Rome to the Corinthians during the Great Dissension attribute the Epistle to Clement of Rome.

Eusebius claimed Clement was bishop for about NINE years but was it was from c 66-75 CE, c 78-87 CE, or c 90-99 CE?

It is clear that no-writer knew when the Great Dissension occurred and when Clement, Linus, and Anacletus were Bishops of Rome.

Ignatius, Irenaeus and Tertullian would be regarded as Fiction Writers if it was Publicly Circulated and known in Corinth and the Roman Empire that they ALL CONTRADICTED themselves with respect to the Bishopric of Clement by 25 years.

There were NO publicly circulated writings showing the 25 year discrepancy. The writings from Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Tertullian about Clement of Rome and the Dissension of the Church of Corinth was unknown to the people of Corinth and the people of the Roman Empire.

Clement of Rome and the Great Dissension of the Church of Corinth was FABRICATED by the Church of Rome.

Duvduv

Would you say that there was someone in the second century writing after Justin who was named Irenaeus who wrote certain identifiable parts of the books, or that he more likely lived in the third century?
And what about Tertullian?
I have always wondered why Irenaeus would say Jesus lived to age 50 if he had the gospels. But could the reference have been to John instead?

andrewcriddle

As I indicated before, I think it is most likely that the claim that Clement was ordained by Peter is a later development of the claim that Clement and Peter worked together.

If one really wanted to reconcile these claims, then one could argue that (according to 1 Clement and other sources) the early Roman Church did not distinguish between Bishops and Presbyters. The early Roman Bishops were the senior members of the order of Presbyters/Bishops rather than Monarchical Bishops in the later sense. Peter ordained Clement, Linus, Anacletus and others as presbyters. Originally Linus was senior Presbyter. On his death Anacletus became senior Presbyter without any new ordination ceremony. On the death of Anacletus Clement became senior Presbyter without any new ordination ceremony.

Hence Clement was ordained as Presbyter/Bishop by Peter in the 60's and became senior Presbyter without any new ordination ceremony c 89 CE.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

No, No, No, Andrew.

Your claim is wholly absurd. No Church writer EVER wrote anything at all like what you are now claiming.

Where did you get your story from?

I will EXPOSE your ERRONEOUS and UNSUBSTANTIATED claim.

The "Preface to the Recognitions" will utterly expose your fallacy.

The Preface to the Recognitions" Andrew, your so-called explanation is NOT good, not valid, it is unsubstantiated.

Clement was INDEED bishop immediately AFTER the death of Peter but LINUS and Cletus were Bishops BEFORE Peter was dead based on the Preface of the Recognitions.

Andrew, When did the Great Dissension happen based on the Preface to the Recognitions?

And there is another MAJOR discrepancy. The Entire Chronology of ALL the Bishops AFTER Clement have been destroyed once Clement was the FOURTH Bishop at 67-68 CE or immediately after the death of Peter.

Clement of Rome, the early bishops of Rome and the Great Dissension of Corinth were FABRICATED by the Roman Church.