dating the birth stories?

[MrMacSon]

Irenaeus placed everything back to the years 30 - 70.

It probably would have been Marcion who did that (if indeed it all did start in the 2nd century) with the start of his Euangelikon -

1. In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar,
2. [in the times of Pontius Pilatus,] Jesus came down to Capernaum, a city in Galilee,
3. He was teaching on the sabbath days in the synagogue: and they were astonished at his doctrine: for his word was with authority

[Bernard Muller]

to Cora,

Irenaeus placed everything back to the years 30 - 70.

It's not Irenaeus who dated everything, but, much earlier, the internal & external evidence for each key text, which place these texts from 50 (for the earliest) and at different times for the others up to Marcion & Justin's times.

Cordially, Bernard

[davidmartin]

Cora, your conviction the catholic church, people like Irenaeus, made stuff up isn't really new
It goes all the way back to the early days of theological study hundreds of years ago, when texts like 1 Peter and 2 Peter started being seen as pseudo-graphical and many on this forum think the gospels are purely fictional, except a few of us
So what you're saying is quite a common thought on here. It's normal
If you tried this on christianchat.com however you would be banned!
the last time i checked them they were still fighting like cats

i'm curious what are the missing pieces you still don't have figured out? what's the parts you find hard to explain? surely there's some

[hakeem]

hakeem,

So before 70 there was absolutely nothing.

I have done my best to tell you what I know. Don't get angry, think about it.
all the best, Cora.

Well, if before 70 there was absolutely nothing then Paul was not real. It is claimed Paul preached Christ crucified and resurrected since the time of Aretas c 37-41 CE was killed in the 14th year of Nero c 68-69 CE by Christian writers.

Paul was absolutely a fictional character who stayed with people who did not exist and received information about his Gospel from the non-existing dead.

[cora]

hakeem,
Aretas and Nero are forgeries of course. Why do you believe Christian writers? I have done all I could to help you understand. It cost me a lot of time. Are you too dumb or trying to annoy me? I am done. Sort it out yourself. Believe what you want.
Cora.

[cora]

Bernard,
They are wrong. You are wrong. It is now found that Justin invented the name iesous (before it was isu). His papers went to Irenaeus in 170. Irenaeus wrote the gospels (except John, he only forged that). Cannot be any different anymore. Get used to it. Stop acting as if you are some sort of authority, judging other people, because you are not judging what is right and wrong. Stop commanding people to do things you want.
Cora

[cora]

MrMacSon,
Very interesting. I had to think about it. What you print is NOT the beginning of the gospel of Marcion. It is what Irenaeus WANTS us to think the beginning is. He was really not giving the original up to us. Can you follow it? It is Irenaeus who does that all. I have found out that Justin has invented the name Jesus and his papers went to Irenaeus. Before it was Isu. As you can see the name Jesus is there, which means it comes from Irenaeus and not from Marcion.
The original story was written after 70. But it played in 30, so they were then already placing back!! Only they were not hiding that it was written in 72. Paul got hold of it (85/90) and I don't know what he did. Until recently I did not even knew he had it. He does not talk about it in his letters. I don't know if he used it and how. I am not sure how it ended and if he used the date of 30. We also do not know that from Marcion. The last page of Marcion is by Irenaeus. After entering Jerusalem everything is fake of course. So we cannot know. We will never know. I know some things about this gospel, but not enough.
The canonical gospels were written by Irenaeus, except John. Paul knew John. I think these two gospels (Marcion = Paul, and John) were "spread". Justin knew Marcions gospel in rome, so they were moving among chrestians (small groups). Irenaeus forged John. John had the familiar arrest etc to the end story. But John is a gnostic and it is not even meant as a factional story. It is more of an artistic personal impression. Paul's gospel could have had another ending. I am almost sure it did. But Irenaeus glued the Jerusalem episode from John onto the 3 gospels he made. So that is all we have. The "installation of the eucharist" comes from Irenaeus. The 3 synoptics are all fake, made by Irenaeus. Only there are a few pieces of Marcion in Mathew (the one he wanted for himself, he completely wrote Mathew) and some more in Luke. There is no more. The gospel of Marcion cannot be restored. It plays in Judea, not in Galilea, that I know. There is no Galilea in it. These gospels all play in 30, and were written according to Irenaeus in 35-65, even before the original story was written, because it "truly" happened . But the original was a written story, fictional, about a human being, about a prophet. I would like to tell you more, but I am finished for now. I suspect Irenaeus a lot of having picked up in Judea an original copy for additional information. Did you know he mentions himself in Mathew in the sermon on the mount?
I have never heard of a scam like this. It was about Jahweh. Jahweh had to win from the gnostic god. Paul and Marcion did not use the OT, they only had isu/jesus. We had to learn the OT and Jahweh because they won. The whole world under Jahweh until today.
Maybe you want to talk again. Thanks for your remarks!!!
greetings, Cora.

[Bernard Muller]

to Cora,

Bernard,
They are wrong. You are wrong. It is now found that Justin invented the name iesous (before it was isu)

And how did you find that? By assuming Marcion got isu from Paul, who you declared was a gnostic.
That's a lot of assumptions back by (at best) weak ill-evidence or not at all.
In Papyrus p46, normally dated around 200 CE, and the earliest one to have (most of) Paul's epistles, the Sacra Nomina for "Jesus" (Ἰησοῦ' (iēsous)) is Ἰηc'. So the Sacra Nomina in p46 indicates iesous rather than isu.

Irenaeus wrote the gospels (except John, he only forged that)

But the gospels have so much evidence against that wild assumption. For example, let's look at gMark, which places Jesus' public life under Pilate's rule (26-36 CE):
9:1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
How could Irenaeus write that when the Kingdom of God obviously had not come yet. That would make Irenaeus dear Jesus a (very) false prophet and a big liar.
Same comment for:
13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Note: "everything done" includes the fall of Jerusalem and: 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

(except John, he only forged that)

And what do you mean by that? I guess that you think a gnostic gJohn existed before Irenaeus made it orthodox. That would be another twist.

Cannot be any different anymore. Get used to it.

Look who is commanding? it's you.

Stop acting as if you are some sort of authority,

I feel I have some authority because I studied the matter for many years, and my study is backed by a lot of evidence at every steps. That's not your case, by far. Just repeating (and often adding up or modifying on the fly) your tons of shifting speculations does not make you an authority on the subject.

because you are not judging what is right and wrong.

And you are a good judge! And one cannot get to the true historical stuff by judging, because judging is prone to biases and errors, especially from you, whose prompt judging seems motivated by your hate of Catholicism (the church of Rome).

Stop commanding people to do things you want.

I am not commanding people, but reasons with them, and display evidence against what they think.
You are the one who is commanding people to accept things you want. And you do that, over and over again.

Cordially, Bernard

[MrMacSon]

MrMacSon,
Very interesting. I had to think about it. What you print is NOT the beginning of the gospel of Marcion. It is what Irenaeus WANTS us to think the beginning is. He was really not giving the original up to us. Can you follow it? It is Irenaeus who does that all. I have found out that Justin has invented the name Jesus and his papers went to Irenaeus.

It's what a few scholars think is the beginning of the Euangeli[k]on of Marcion as gleaned from Tertullian (who would have had a copy of or access to Irenaeus' stuff; and likely to Justin Martyr's writings, too (whether through Irenaeus or seprately)

The original story was written after 70. But it played in 30, so they were then already placing back!! Only they were not hiding [when] it was written

Lena Einhorn has certainly put certainly a good argument that at least some NT characters and aspects of the NT narratives were borrowed from Josephus in her 2016 book, A Shift in Time.

The concepts are outlined in this article presented to a Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting in November 2012

• http://lenaeinhorn.se/english/wp-conten ... .11.25.pdf

[hakeem]

Lena Einhorn has certainly put certainly a good argument that at least some NT characters and aspects of the NT narratives were borrowed from Josephus in her 2016 book, A Shift in Time.

The concepts are outlined in this article presented to a Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting in November 2012

• http://lenaeinhorn.se/english/wp-conten ... .11.25.pdf

One does need Lena Einhorn to show that the NT Jesus story, names of NT characters and even events were lifted from the works of Jospehus.

The author of Acts copied the writings of Josephus so openly that he claimed his main character Saul/Paul was shipwrecked when traveling to Rome about the same time as Josephus en-route to Rome.

The stories of NT Jesus and Paul are products of stories found in the works of Josephus.