Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 10-03-2011, 02:07 PM

I have FINALLY BUSTED the Roman Church and "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus.

The last part of the puzzle has been INSERTED and the PICTURE is FRAUD, FORGERY and FICTION.

"Against Heresies" 22.5

Quote:

Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years,(1) and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as
the Gospel and all the elders testify, those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information........

"Against Heresies"2.22.6

Quote:

For it is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were
mistaken by twenty years, when they wished to prove Him younger than
the times of Abraham. For what they saw, that they also expressed; and
He whom they beheld was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being(5) of
flesh and blood. He did not then wont much of being fifty years
old..."

Amazingly I have read "Against Heresies" 2 many times and have completely missed the EXTREME significance of the claim in "Against Heresies" 2 that Jesus was about 50 years old when he suffered.

The FRAUD, FORGERY and FICTION of the History of the Church is forever CAST in STONE.

aa5874 · 10-03-2011, 10:32 PM

"Against Heresies" 2.22 is a two-thousand word argument to attempt to show Jesus Christ was about 50 years old when he was crucified.

"Against Heresies" 2.22 does NOT appear to be the product of "scribal error" since the author claimed John the disciple did TEACH that Jesus was about fifty years old.

And NOT only that, the Gospel and ALL those conversant with John did claim that Jesus was about 50 years old when he suffered.

Let me recap the claims of "Against Heresies" 2.22. at the crucifixion of Jesus

1. John the disciple PREACHED Jesus was about 50 YEARS OLD.

2. The Gospel stated Jesus was about 50 years old.

3. All those who were conversant with John did admit they were told Jesus was about 50 years old.

There is one thing that NOW must be established.

When was Jesus born according to "Against Heresies"?

The author of 'AH' (Against Heresies") used gLuke to claim Jesus was about to be 30 years old at the Baptism.

"Against Heresies" 2.22

Quote:

For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: "Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,"(13) when He came to receive baptism)....

So, based on "AH" 22, Jesus was about to be 30 years old when he was Baptized.

When was Jesus baptized in "AH"?

In the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius .

"Against Heresies" 3.14.3

Quote:

For through him we have become acquainted with....... the number of the Lord's years when He was baptized, and that this occurred in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar.

Let us go back. According to "AH":

1. Jesus was about 30 years old in the 15th year of Tiberius.

2. Jesus was about 50 years old when he was crucified.

3. John the disciple , till the time of Trajan, preached that Jesus was about 50 years old at crucifixion.

4. John the disciple, till the time of Trajan, told acquaintances that Jesus was about 50 years old at crucifixion.

5. The Gospel stated Jesus was about 50 years.

Once Jesus is claimed to have been about 30 years old in the 15th year of Tiberius then in "Against Heresies" Jesus was born around 1 BCE or 1 CE.

The BIRTH of Jesus is LOCKED in "Against Heresies" to 1 BCE or 1 CE.

It was therefore argued in "AH" 2.22 that Jesus was crucified around 44-50 CE and that it was also preached by John the disciple of Jesus.

"Against Heresies" has EXPOSED the FRAUD, FICTION and FORGERIES of the history of the Church..

The PUZZLE has been SOLVED.

To be continued.

mountainman · 10-03-2011, 11:14 PM

An Example of further possible false (chronologicial) data in "Against Heresies" - dating gJudas

The Eusebian edited text of "Against Heresies" is also being used to advance authoritative statements concerning the chronology of a number of vile heretical Gnostic Gospels, such as the Gospel of Judas.

The following from earlychristianwritings:

Quote:

H.-C. Puech and Beate Blatz write (New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1, p. 387):

Dating:

the Gospel of Judas was of course composed before 180, the date at which it is mentioned for the first time by Irenaeus in adv. Haer. If it is in fact a Cainite work, and if this sect - assuming it was an independent gnostic group - was constituted in part, as has sometimes been asserted, in dependence on the doctrine of Marcion, the apocryphon can scarcely have been composed before the middle of the 2nd century. This would, however, be to build on weak arguments. At most we may be inclined to suspect a date between 130 and 170 or thereabouts.

It remains to be seen whether any manuscripts to be published might correspond to the Gospel of Judas mentioned by Irenaeus of Lyons.

The National Geographic in 2006 arranged for the radio carbon dating of the gJudas manuscript and the result was 280 CE plus or minus 60 years.

The history of the church says between 130 and 170 CE.
The C14 says between 220 and 340 CE.

At the moment the world's scholarship prefers the chronology tendered by Eusebius (via Irenaeus's "Against Heresies") over the C14. There is a great deal of inertia to hang on to the "History of the Church" as tendered by Eusebius during the momentous "Christian Revolution" of the 4th century.

aa5874 · 10-04-2011, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

.....At the moment the world's scholarship prefers the chronology tendered by Eusebius (via Irenaeus's "Against Heresies") over the C14. There is a great deal of inertia to hang on to the "History of the Church" as tendered by Eusebius during the momentous "Christian Revolution" of the 4th century.

Well, don't worry anymore. Thanks to you.

The puzzle has been finally solved.

It will be shown using the very writings of the Church that "Against Heresies" and the History of the Church are products of FRAUD, FORGERY and FICTION.

Just remember these six-points from "Against Heresies" until I post again.

1. Jesus was about 30 years old in the 15th year of Tiberius.

2. Jesus was about 50 years old when he was crucified.

3. John the disciple , till the time of Trajan, preached that Jesus was about 50 years old at crucifixion.

4. John the disciple, till the time of Trajan, told acquaintances that Jesus was about 50 years old at crucifixion.

5. The Gospel stated Jesus was about 50 years.

6. The birth of Jesus is LOCKED at about 1 BCE-1CE.

aa5874 · 10-05-2011, 10:08 AM

Now, it is TIME to EXPOSE the FRAUD, FORGERY and FICTION in "Against Heresies".

In "Against Heresies" 2.22 it is claimed that John the disciple was ALIVE up to the time of TRAJAN and told people that Jesus was ABOUT to be 50 years old when he suffered or that he died sometime around 44-50 CE.

Now, TRAJAN was Emperor c 98 -117 CE which would mean that John would have PREACHED and TAUGHT for around 50 years, 5 DECADES, that Jesus was KNOWN to have died during the REIGN of Claudius.

But WAIT a MINUTE.

CONCENTRATE!!!

If John, a disciple of Jesus, was preaching that Jesus was about 50 years when he died then ALL the disciples and ALL THE Gospels SHOULD SHOW that Jesus was INDEED crucified UNDER CLAUDIUS and NOT TIBERIUS.

IF JESUS did ACTUALLY LIVE then EVERYBODY in antiquity who KNEW Jesus and that he was Crucified under CLAUDIUS would have KNOWN the Gospel stories were blatant LIES.

1. In gJohn, Jesus was crucified when Caiaphas was high priest and Pilate was Governor. Caiaphas was high priest and Pilate was governor in the reign of Tiberius. See John 18.13 and 18.29.

2. In gLuke, Jesus was crucified when Caiaphas was high priest and Pilate was Governor in the reign of Tiberius. See Luke 3.1-2 and 23.1

3. In gMatthew, Jesus was crucified when Caiaphas was high priest and Pilate was Governor. Tiberius was Emperor during the time of Caiaphas and Pilate. See Matthew 26.3 and 27.2

So how in the world could John the disciple preach for about 5 decades that Jesus was crucified under Claudius when his OWN supposed Gospel show that it was REALLY in the time of TIBERIUS?

In "Against Heresies" the birth of Jesus is LOCKED to 1BCE-1 CE when it was claimed Jesus was about to be 30 years old in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius using gLuke.

Please, CONCENTRATE.

The author of "Against Heresies" was NOT AWARE of PAUL, the Pauline writings, and Acts of the Apostles.

If the author was AWARE of PAUL then it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for him to claim Jesus Christ was crucified under CLAUDIUS.

"PAUL" STARTED PREACHING CHRIST CRUCIFIED SINCE during the REIGN of ARETAS.

ARETAS DIED BEFORE CLAUDIUS was Emperor.

2 Corinthians 11.31-32.

Quote:

31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.

32 In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me

33 And through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped his hands....

In Acts 2. Peter was ALREADY preaching CHRIST CRUCIFIED since the DAY of Pentecost BEFORE "Paul" started to preach about the Crucifixion of Jesus.

"Against Heresies" is a compilation of FRAUD, FORGERY and FICTION.

John the disciple could NOT have claimed that Jesus was Crucified under Claudius when John himself should have BEEN in a house on the DAY of Pentecost in Acts long BEFORE Claudius was Emperor and long BEFORE "Paul" was in Damascus.

"Against Heresies" has been BUSTED.

The author of the 2000 word argument in "Against Heresies" 2.22 that Jesus was about 50 years when he suffered old really KNEW ZERO of ACTS of the Apostles, ZERO of Paul and ZERO of the Pauline writings.

And further, to maintain the 2000 word argument AGAINST HERETICS also SIGNIFIES that the very HERETICS knew ZERO of Acts of the Apostles, ZERO of Paul and ZERO or the Pauline.

Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings are HISTORICALLY BOGUS, products of FRAUD, FICTION AND FORGERY.

It is ALL over now. The puzzle has been solved.

Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings MUST BE UNKNOWN by Irenaeus, the Heretics and EVERY-ONE else to argue that Jesus Christ was about to be 50 years old when he was crucified under Claudius.

Iskander · 10-05-2011, 10:18 AM

It may surprise you but Christians do not read Irenaeus and none of them gives a fig for his opinion.

Irenaeus is read only by rationalist gladiators that like dressing up and talk funny.

aa5874 · 10-05-2011, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

It may surprise you but Christians do not read Irenaeus and none of them gives a fig for his opinion.

Irenaeus is read only by rationalist gladiators that like dressing up and talk funny.

The HISTORY of the Church was FUNDAMENTALLY based on the writings of "Irenaeus".

Please read "Church History" by Eusebius.

Now that "Against Heresies" is BUSTED and is shown to be a book of FRAUD, FICTION and FORGERIES then the History of the Church is NOW a product of a CRIME.

All writings that mention Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings have been SUBJECTED to acts of FRAUD.

It is CLEAR that NO-ONE knew of Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings when it was claimed Jesus was about to be 50 years old when he suffered under Claudius.

Iskander · 10-05-2011, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

It may surprise you but Christians do not read Irenaeus and none of them gives a fig for his opinion.

Irenaeus is read only by rationalist gladiators that like dressing up and talk funny.

The HISTORY of the Church was FUNDAMENTALLY based on the writings of "Irenaeus".

Please read "Church History" by Eusebius.

Now that "Against Heresies" is BUSTED and is shown to be a book of FRAUD, FICTION and FORGERIES then the History of the Church is NOW a product of a CRIME.

All writings that mention Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings have been SUBJECTED to acts of FRAUD.

It is CLEAR that NO-ONE knew of Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings when it was claimed Jesus was about to be 50 years old when he suffered under Claudius.

The history of any society is full of peculiarities. You give too much weight to historical problems of no importance.

There is a deeply religious undercurrent in your obsession with trivia; religious people also build on nothing as in the case of the doctrine of the original sin...

aa5874 · 10-05-2011, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

[...The history of any society is full of peculiarities. You give too much weight to historical problems of no importance.....

That is really odd. You seem to place some importance to my posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

...There is a deeply religious undercurrent in your obsession with trivia; religious people also build on nothing as in the case of the doctrine of the original sin...

You seem interested in trivia.

This is a BIG BUST.

The Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles were really UNKNOWN.

Irenaeus did NOT use Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings AT ALL when he argued Jesus was about to be 50 years old when he died in his 2000 word argument.

It cannot EVER be argued again that the Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles were written BEFORE "Against Heresiis" 2.

The FRAUD, FORGERIES AND FICTION has been EXPOSED.

Acts of the Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings MUST be UNKNOWN by EVERY-ONE, including Irenaeus, and the Heretics to argue that Jesus was about be 50 years old when he died under Claudius.

Iskander · 10-05-2011, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

[...The history of any society is full of peculiarities. You give too much weight to historical problems of no importance.....

That is really odd. You seem to place some importance to my posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

...There is a deeply religious undercurrent in your obsession with trivia; religious people also build on nothing as in the case of the doctrine of the original sin...

You seem interested in trivia.

This is a BIG BUST.

The Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles were really UNKNOWN.

Irenaeus did NOT use Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings AT ALL when he argued Jesus was about to be 50 years old when he died in his 2000 word argument.

It cannot EVER be argued again that the Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles were written BEFORE "Against Heresiis" 2.

The FRAUD, FORGERIES AND FICTION has been EXPOSED.

Acts of the Acts of the Apostles, Paul and the Pauline writings MUST be UNKNOWN by EVERY-ONE, including Irenaeus, and the Heretics to argue that Jesus was about be 50 years old when he died under Claudius.

I like your posts, they are full of the zeal of the reformer, but I will not respond to them for a while..:wave:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-05-2011, 10:18 AM	#6
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	It may surprise you but Christians do not read Irenaeus and none of them gives a fig for his opinion. Irenaeus is read only by rationalist gladiators that like dressing up and talk funny.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.