Duvduv

Ergo, the question of the integrity of stories provided by Eusebius about his alleged predecessors as historians, the so-called heretical sects, etc. can be called into question, including what texts were actually known in 325.

Toto

Pete - you've had almost a decade to make your case for Eusebian fabrication of the entirety of Christian history, and you have failed. You can just keep repeating "what if Eusebius forged everything?" You don't have a coherent theory to support this idea, much less a way of accounting for the contrary evidence and arguments.

Anyone who seriously cares about this issue should search the archives.

mountainman

The apologists claim to have had 2000 years, and they too have failed in their case, despite the might and wealth of our beloved tax-exempt and despotic church institutions and the academic sponsorship and tenure. I am just one old Australian surfer, and they are the hegemon.



The apologists just keep repeating the mantra "what if the gospels are true"? They do not have a theory for the history of the pre-Nicaean epoch except for the research that Eusebius tendered in his thesis on the subject conducted between 312 and 324 CE, and Eusebius's history thesis has yet to be peer-reviewed.



Should all the HJ hobby-horses get stabled while we wait for Bart Ehrman's next book?

Toto

Maybe that's why apologists have a bad rep around here? Why do you want to emulate them? :constern01:


If you have nothing new or productive to say, that might be the best thing to do.

mountainman

I appear to emulate their dialectic because I have taken a position that is quite diametrically and antithetically opposed to their position, as everyone by now should be well aware. I am prepared to discuss both the positive and negative evidence against my position, and have taken the opportunity to rationally defend the position against all forms of negative evidence citations. I reject the notion that I emulate the behaviour of any specific group of people who inhabit this discussion space.

I also reject the notion that the motivation for my research is driven by a hatred of religion. I seek the ancient historical truth of the origins of the two sides of the coin of the appearance of the new testament phenomenom: the new testament canonical books and the non canonical books of the vile docetic gnostic heretics.