Duvduv

Yes, the emerging church used them in their biblical canon as a single set. There is no evidence of any group exclusively preferring one of the canonical canonical gospels over any other.

aa5874

What??? Please, state the Source for the claims about Your "Emerging Church"?? You cannot have any credible evidence.

There is no credible evidence whatsoever that the Church emerged in the 4th century.

outhouse

I only stated I know Gjohn was from a community because the work states it does, and is composed of multiple authors.

the rest is not up for debate, and you would be hard pressed to find a decents scholar who states differently.

outhouse

not until 325 AD

and yes there is evidence that they were canonized in different forms at different dates.

the original composition doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure they came from different geographic locations

Duvduv

Whether or not they came from different geographic areas is not the point, and neither is whether they were simply WRITTEN by people from different regions. The fact is they were always presented as a SET of four gospels by officialdom written in a biblical style as a canonical set of documents. There is NO EVIDENCE that any single "heretical sect" only recognized one or another of the set to the exclusion of the others.

aa5874

It is NOT claimed that the Memoirs of the Apostles are a lump of Canonical Gospels in the writings attributed to Justin.

You appear to be making mis-leading statements.

Justin's "Memoirs of the Apostles" contained information that is NOT found in the Canonised Gospel.

You MUST first read writings attributed to Justin and NOT imagine.

You MUST also read writing attributed to Irenaeus and NOT imagine.

Now, in "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus it is claimed the Ebionites used gMatthew ONLY and that the Valentians used gJohn and the Marcionites used gLuke. ---See "Against Heresies".


Personally, I think the claims of some ancient propagandists about various sects is legend, myth, heresay and outright invention.

Who did you say??? Eusebius??? Who was Eusebius???Why do you BELIEVE Eusebius wrote anything in the 4th century??? You BELIEVE the propagandists!!!.

Duvduv

I don't know if there really was a Eusebius. i refer to the writer with that name by way of shorthand.
Yeah, yeah, I know what "Irenaeus" says. But there is no evidence of this whatsoever. Certainly how could one out of a set of four gospels advocated by "Irenaeus" have been used by this one "heretical sect" to the exclusion of the others, especially if according to official "orthodoxy" the set of 4 had been a set since the beginning........???

aa5874

Your statement is wholly absurd and confirms that you are not credible. We have both engaged in discussions. Please, you seem unaware that people all over the world can identify your blatant erroneous claim.

aa5874

So you are engaged in a NO Source argument. You have No source, you have NO EVIDENCE to support your arguments and is just arguing for argument sake.

Please, if you don't know what you are talking about why do you call people of antiquity propagandists??

You need to identify credible sources and evidence in order to resolve any matter.

You have NONE.

outhouse

your fact is wrong with the word "always" we know they existed early, but the date they were combined as a set is another story


how do you explain marcion not using all of them and being the first to combine a few of these but not all. ya you know 150 BC ish