Just out of curiosity, do you believe Papias in everything? Do you also believe that Judas got so fat he couldn't fit through a cart path, got hit by a cart and exploded? (and that's the more toned down version, The Appolinaris version is even goofier). Is Papias infallible? Even Eusebius called him "a man of small intellect."
i quote:
Drop the fathers when they don’t agree with you
Christians cherry-pick what they want out of the early Church fathers, cite is as historically correct within the cloak of “tradition,” and then ignore those writings counter to their position.
They embrace Papias when it comes to authorship of Mark and Matthew; ignore and abandon him when it comes to Judas’ death, Jesus statements, or the Gospel of Hebrews because he becomes inconvenient. Embrace Acts of Peter regarding how Peter died; ignore Acts of Peter why Peter died. Same with Acts of Paul. Discard Gospel of Peter as “too fanciful;” embrace Gospel of Matthew as historical fact. Point out Ignatius’ use of the star phenomenon at Jesus’ birth; ignore it is nothing like the account of Matthew.
Write off the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, hold as historical the petulant Jesus child of Luke 2. Point out 1 Clement’s use of Jesus’ saying; ignore that pesky phoenix. The list goes on and on and on.
Perhaps more relevant to our present topic, utilize Clement of Alexandria for the gospel order; disregard Clement’s claim Cephas and Peter were two separate people.
As these discussions go, the Christians’ method becomes apparent—if it was written within the 1st or 2nd Century AND it helps the Christian’s immediate argument—then consider it “historical.” If it does not, either ignore it, or discard it for being “too late” or “legendary.”
Why the first 100 years? (“100 years” from what?) Why such an arbitrary number? Why not 80? Or 120? Frankly, your article relies heavily on Eusebius, who is outside the 100 years, so clearly 100 is not a bright-line cut-off.
.