aa5874

You need to deal with your other points because "On the Flesh of Christ" Specifically States that Jesus EXISTED as the Son of God WITHOUT a human mother BEFORE he was born.

"On the Flesh of Christ" 18 I hope Tertullian has ANSWERED your questions about the NATURE of his Jesus.

Terullian appears to believe Jesus EXISTED as God's Son Before he was born.

Now, you have suspicions that writings of Tertullian and Irenaeus were written later than admitted by Church writers and I must say the evidence from antiquity support what you suspect.

I am NO longer at the suspicion stage. I have ADVANCED to the Next level.

This is a partial list of writings, wholly or impart, from supposed apologetic sources that were written LATER than the Church has admitted.

1. gMatthew

2. gMark

3. gLuke

4. gJohn

5. Acts of the Apostles

6. All writings under the name of Paul

7. 1 st Peter

8.The Epistle of James

9. The Epistle of Jude

10. The Epistle of John

11. The Letters of Ignatius

12. The First letter of Clememt of Rome.

13. ALL Letters of Polycarp.

14. Writings of Papias.

15. Writings under the name of Irenaeus.

16. Writings under the name of Tertullian.

17. Writings under the name of Origen.

This is a partial list of apologetic writings that appear to be credible and compatible with non-apologetic sources.

1. Writings under the name of Justin Martyr.

2. Writings under the name of Theophilus of Antioch.

3. Writings under the name of Athenagoras.

4. The Apology of Aristides.

5. Municius Felix "Octavius.

Duvduv

That's true......but that's not the point. They debate the pre-existence of the Christ, but this does not affect that they believed that the Christ still had a physical existence in this world as I quoted from that document. That's all. Again, according to your view, WHEN did "Christians" begin to view the Christ as physical man? Was it in the 3rd century? The fourth century?

aa5874

You don't seem to understand the concept of EXISTENCE as stated by Tertullian and the claim that Jesus actually EXISTED BEFORE all things.

As I have stated before the Jesus story appears to have started sometime in the 2nd century since the Pauline Jesus is completely unknown in any non-apologetic sources in the 1st century and by Justin Martyr up to the mid 2nd century.

The Gospels or the "Memoirs of the Apostles" PREDATED the Pauline writings, all other Epistles and Acts of the Apostles.

Duvduv

PREVIOUS EXISTENCE does not preclude the possibility of manifestation in a true physical form (as opposed to a hologram). And IF INDEED Irenaeus and Tertullian believed their Christ to be equivalent to an angel in terms of physicality, they would have said so. And if the manifestation of the savior combining divine seed with a human female womb is either not novel or IS novel, they would have explained it as such.

However, as I have posted, they believed him to be a flesh and blood man. It doesn't matter what biology teaches either. This is how they saw it. And I repeat, it is possible, entirely possible, that these expressions were NOT from the 2nd century but later additions.
AND, it is possible that the "pauline" letters emerged independently of the gospel stories into the 3rd century....

Doug Shaver

Your opinion is correct. It is also irrelevant until somebody claims that Eusebius wrote the gospel truth.

aa5874

Why do you keep on making completely unsubstantiated claims about the nature of Jesus when there is a WHOLE Book that STATED that Jesus was GOD without a human mother and that he remained God after he was born of a Virgin?

Do you NOT remember that it was HERETICAL to preach that Jesus was a man with a human father?

Please read "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus.

Please read "Prescription Against the Heretics" attributed to Tertullian.

Please read "Refutation of All Heresies" attributed to Hippolytus.

I do not accept people's imagination as evidence of anything.

It is Documented that the Church writers considered the claim that Jesus was a MERE HUMAN BEING as Heresy.

Duvduv

His ability to be both a divine being and a human being is acceptable to those who believed and WORRIED ABOUT the fleshly status of Jesus. In their world he could be a human and divine, a human even though he didn't have a human father.
But why do you ask so many questions? aa5874, I thought you don't like questions. ;-)