Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Duvduv · 02-18-2012, 04:29 PM

What's interesting about good old Clement is that he doesn't even reference any of the NT texts at all. And Ignatius seemed to be trying to mimick the paulines after the "canon" was already decided.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by mullerb

1. The letters of Ignatius: Forged, absolutely, but one of them named Paul. And isn't 2nd century?

2. 1 Clement: The author does not say he is Clement or anybody else. Just anonymous. First century in my book (and for many others), later for some, but most of those placed it in the 2nd century, not later.

3. Acts of the Apostles: First century for many and myself (main external evidence: gJohn and epistle of (allegedly!) Barnabas), 2nd for others

4. All The Pauline writings being forgeries: That's your opinion, not mine and many others.

5. "Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian: Anyway that's third century. Are you saying, as some, Marcion invented Paul or/and his letters? Or any of (modified) Pauline letters were not in Marcion's canon? Or "Against Marcion" is not by Tertullian?

6. Writings of Polycarp: Forgery or not, I do not care, but still 2nd century.

7. Writings of Papias: Papias did not say a thing about Paul, as far as I know. Are the few writings known through Irenaeus & Eusebius forgeries? I do not think so.

Anyway, except of course for some (7) of the Pauline epistles, it does not matter if the other writings are forged or not, the issue is if they mention Paul or/and his epistles AND written no later than the 2nd century. If, at least, a few do that (both conditions), then this "testimony" goes against your theory.

And what about Epistula Apostolorum & Ptolemy. Forgeries? Not 2nd century?

Duvduv · 02-18-2012, 04:32 PM

All I see from this is that the book supposedly authored by one Irenaeus had multiple authors, one of whom was writing BEFORE the canonical gospels appeared on the scene, and no one even bothered to notice......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

How interesting that the man who spoke of the four gospels should have confused the name of the Caesar and be off by 10 years. Didn't he ever see Luke?? Didn't this writer know that Luke also said that Jesus was around 30 years old when he ministered? Where does Ireneaeus want to prove that Jesus was allegedly around ministering for 20 years?
Are there various manuscripts of this book that have the correct name if scribal errors can account for such errors:

"In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David [see also The Chosen People and Ruth], to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn." (Luke 2:1-7 RSV)

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The author of "Against Heresies" 2.22 claimed Jesus was crucified under CLAUDIUS in another writing, and such a claim would be totally RIDICULOUS and FALSE once the TF was already publicly known and circulated within the Roman Empire.

Irenaeus was supposedly a Presbyter and Bishop of the Church and was in Rome at some time.

Examine the Evidence that has confirmed a Crime Against Humanity was committed and KNOWN by the Roman Church.

Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching attributed to Irenaeus.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/irenaeus_02_proof.htm

aa5874 · 02-18-2012, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

All I see from this is that the book supposedly authored by one Irenaeus had multiple authors, one of whom was writing BEFORE the canonical gospels appeared on the scene, and no one even bothered to notice......

What!!!!

Irenaeus supposedly wrote FIVE BOOKS "Against Heresies" and NOBODY noticed.

This is quite remarkable.

The HERETICS did NOT Notice!!!!

The Church did NOT Notice.

Irenaeus, the Presbyter and Bishop, did NOT Notice and wrote another book and again Nobody Notice for Hundreds of years.

Incredibly Eusebius quoted "Against Heresies" 2.22 and completely missed the 2000 word argument that Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old under Claudius.

By the way, Nobody from the Church Noticed Tertullian wrote FIVE BOOKS "Against Marcion" and Justin Martyr did NOT notice that Paul wrote 13 letters to Churches.

People generally do NOT Notice things that do NOT exist.

Duvduv · 02-18-2012, 04:56 PM

Where did the books attributed to Irenaeus, or the ones attributed to Origen actually originate? And how is it that no one even noticed that the Irenaeus book claiming to know the GLUke and other gospels presented "facts" contradicting the sacred gospel?!

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

All I see from this is that the book supposedly authored by one Irenaeus had multiple authors, one of whom was writing BEFORE the canonical gospels appeared on the scene, and no one even bothered to notice......

What!!!!

Irenaeus supposedly wrote FIVE BOOKS "Against Heresies" and NOBODY noticed.

This is quite remarkable.

The HERETICS did NOT Notice!!!!

The Church did NOT Notice.

Irenaeus, the Presbyter and Bishop, did NOT Notice and wrote another book and again Nobody Notice for Hundreds of years.

Incredibly Eusebius quoted "Against Heresies" 2.22 and completely missed the 2000 word argument that Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old under Claudius.

By the way, Nobody from the Church Noticed Tertullian wrote FIVE BOOKS "Against Marcion" and Justin Martyr did NOT notice that Paul wrote 13 letters to Churches.

People generally do NOT Notice things that do NOT exist.

Bernard Muller · 02-18-2012, 05:26 PM

to Duvduv:

Quote:

What's interesting about good old Clement is that he doesn't even reference any of the NT texts at all. And Ignatius seemed to be trying to mimick the paulines after the "canon" was already decided.....

Actually "Clement" referred to Paul and some of his epistles:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...t-roberts.html
and he used material found in gMark which he distorted to fit his agenda:
http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html
As for "Ignatius", he knew Paul was writing letters. To mimick them does not require these Pauline letters had to be considered canonical.

Quote:

All I see from this is that the book supposedly authored by one Irenaeus had multiple authors, one of whom was writing BEFORE the canonical gospels appeared on the scene, and no one even bothered to notice......

Please note that in AH 2.22, Irenaeus was reacting against the belief Jesus' ministry lasted one year only (as it is suggested in the Synoptic gospels) right before proposing the 20 years. And in AH2.22 Irenaeus knew about gJohn which he described in some details (including mentioning the 3 Passovers in it) and named John as the one (allegedly) supplying the info for the gospel. He also named 'Luke' and quoted gLuke. He also quoted gMatthew, named and quoted the epistle to the Romans. He also mentioned "gospels" plural.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103222.htm

aa5874 · 02-18-2012, 05:33 PM

So far in my investigation, I have found that all writings in the NT Canon were AFTER the Fall of the Temple and that the Pauline letters, Acts of the Apostles and gLuke were UNKNOWN up to the writings attributed to Against Heresies 2.22.

I have also found that the succession of Bishops are all INVENTED.

The history of the Jesus cult appears to be based on the Short-Ending gMark where a story was written AFTER the Fall of the Temple about a supposed Messiah that was Betrayed, Abandoned, Denied by his own disciples and Rejected by the Jews who delivered him to be crucified.

But, it was NOT the story of the crucifixion that really caused the start of the Jesus cult--it was the Claim that the Crucified Messiah was coming back to deal with those who did NOT BELIEVE in the gMark Messiah.

Mark 14

Quote:

Again the chief priest asked him and said to him: Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62 And Jesus said: I am; and you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven....

The Jesus cult was started simply because people Believed the gMark story that the crucified Jesus was the Messiah and that he was SOON coming back with an Everlasting Kingdom that appears to have been prophecied by Daniel.

Daniel 7

Quote:

13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away , and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed ....

Bernard Muller · 02-18-2012, 05:55 PM

Quote:

So far in my investigation, I have found that all writings in the NT Canon were AFTER the Fall of the Temple and that the Pauline letters, Acts of the Apostles and gLuke were UNKNOWN up to the writings attributed to Against Heresies 2.22.

So what was first, AH 2.22 OR the Pauline letters & gLuke?
When do you think AH 2.22 was written?

Duvduv · 02-18-2012, 05:57 PM

I guess I was thinking more of the so-called biography when he went to Judea. But your reference isn't a very impressive source considering the fact that "Paul" was the big apostle of the risen Christ, etc.
Do you believe that Ignatius was a real person writing letters to mimick Paul?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mullerb

to Duvduv:

Quote:

What's interesting about good old Clement is that he doesn't even reference any of the NT texts at all. And Ignatius seemed to be trying to mimick the paulines after the "canon" was already decided.....

Actually "Clement" referred to Paul and some of his epistles:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...t-roberts.html
and he used material found in gMark which he distorted to fit his agenda:
http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html
As for "Ignatius", he knew Paul was writing letters. To mimick them does not require these Pauline letters had to be considered canonical.

Quote:

All I see from this is that the book supposedly authored by one Irenaeus had multiple authors, one of whom was writing BEFORE the canonical gospels appeared on the scene, and no one even bothered to notice......

Please note that in AH 2.22, Irenaeus was reacting against the belief Jesus' ministry lasted one year only (as it is suggested in the Synoptic gospels) right before proposing the 20 years. And in AH2.22 Irenaeus knew about gJohn which he described in some details (including mentioning the 3 Passovers in it) and named John as the one (allegedly) supplying the info for the gospel. He also named 'Luke' and quoted gLuke. He also quoted gMatthew, named and quoted the epistle to the Romans. He also mentioned "gospels" plural.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103222.htm

aa5874 · 02-18-2012, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mullerb

Quote:

So far in my investigation, I have found that all writings in the NT Canon were AFTER the Fall of the Temple and that the Pauline letters, Acts of the Apostles and gLuke were UNKNOWN up to the writings attributed to Against Heresies 2.22.

So what was first, AH 2.22 OR the Pauline letters & gLuke?
When do you think AH 2.22 was written?

"Against Heresies" was composed by at least two different authors and is a massive forgery most likely authorized by the Roman Church.

One of the authors did NOT know that Paul supposedly preached Christ crucified since the REIGN of King Aretas long BEFORE the reign of Claudius.

Please, do some research.

Aristides and Justin Martyr also stated that it was 12 illiterate men that preached the Gospel to every race of men in the world and did NOT ever mention Paul.

See "First Apology" XXXIX

Quote:

For from Jerusalem there went out into the world, men, twelve in number, and these illiterate........ by the power of God they proclaimed to every race of men that they were sent by Christ to teach to all the word of God...

Justin Martyr mentioned John the Baptist, James, Peter, the 12 disciples and John of Revelation but did NOT ever mention Paul.

All writings with the name Paul before the Against Heresies 2.22 are bogus.

Bernard Muller · 02-18-2012, 06:46 PM

to Duvduv,

Quote:

I guess I was thinking more of the so-called biography when he went to Judea. But your reference isn't a very impressive source considering the fact that "Paul" was the big apostle of the risen Christ, etc.

I do not know what you meant in your first sentence.
As I said before, Paul was not well received everywhere, during his lifetime and more than one hundred years after he disappeared. Ebionites detested him, Jewish Christians resisted his teachings and some Orthodox Christians thought he was the apostle of the Gnostics. Look at Paul's letters (more so the Corinthians and Galateans): at time he was abandoned by his own converts, sometimes almost completely, and was either mad & furious about it, or humbled & low key (i.e. let's be friends again). He had to justify his credentials several times, even invoking a vision saying that despite his (obvious) weaknesses, the heavenly Jesus chose him as his apostle. He had to acknowledge other competing apostles were superlative and admit his own handicap: he was a very poor public speaker and certainly not imposing.

Quote:

Do you believe that Ignatius was a real person writing letters to mimick Paul?

I think Ignatius was only a lower class, somewhere from Syria, zealous Christian who got arrested while in Rome and given to the beasts, because of his preaching. Then some 20 to 30 years later, different authors from Asia minor wrote the Ignatian letters, one for each letter, around 125-145, for establishing city-wide bishop in their city.
Anyway I have a long webpage for justifying all that and more:
http://historical-jesus.info/ignatius.html

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.