Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by Secret Alias »

The point is that Pete hasn't even read Origen but, despite obvious difficulties, he is made to fit into his fourth century conspiracy theory. No means no.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by Ulan »

schillingklaus wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 8:16 am That's not a core Christian message but a hilarious superstition.
Yeah, but a hilarious superstition that became the standard position of the church very early on. This was just one of the grievances his opponents had with the teachings of Origen, grievances that had nothing to do with Platonism, but with his doubting that the canonical texts, which according to Leucius Charinus didn't exist, could be read as historically true. Which in turn brings me to what I was actually addressing with this example: Origen is obviously one of the more intellectually capable early Christian writers, and this intellectual capability even shows in his writings that deal with obviously orthodox Christian texts. Why would anyone forging Christianity forge a text that throws shade on orthodox Christan writings?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by Secret Alias »

Or perhaps, Origen has personality. Bots don't have personality. Even today. Why should we expect so much personality from a supposedly ancient 'bot'?
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by Ulan »

Sure, that too. My main issue here is that, while forgers may forge texts that refute supposed critics or heretics, stuff like "Adversus haereses" or "Contra Celsum" (not saying those are forged, but at least I can see why this could make sense as forgeries to address controversies current to the time of their writing), they usually don't forge texts that doubt their own main religious texts.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by MrMacSon »

What Origen really wrote, and that much of what he wrote, seems to be up for debate, based on what I have gleaned from researching Pamphilus and finding out about what he and Eusebius are said to have written about Origen, and how that was received by the likes of Rufinus and Jerome, and disputed b/w them: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10139

I'm yet to unpack it all (it all looks very convolute and complicated)
Last edited by MrMacSon on Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by MrMacSon »

Ulan wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:14 pm ... they usually don't forge texts that doubt their own main religious texts.
But they often redacted those texts
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by Ulan »

Sure. The synoptic gospels themselves or the Testimonium Flavianum are witness to that. However, that has nothing to do with my argument.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by GakuseiDon »

Ulan wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:14 pmMy main issue here is that, while forgers may forge texts that refute supposed critics or heretics, stuff like "Adversus haereses" or "Contra Celsum" (not saying those are forged, but at least I can see why this could make sense as forgeries to address controversies current to the time of their writing), they usually don't forge texts that doubt their own main religious texts.
Yes, that's what I see as a major difficulty for LC's theory.

Take Origen's approach to writing history:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html

CHAP. XLII.

Before we begin our reply, we have to remark that the endeavour to show, with regard to almost any history, however true, that it actually occurred, and to produce an intelligent conception regarding it, is one of the most difficult undertakings that can be attempted, and is in some instances an impossibility. For suppose that some one were to assert that there never had been any Trojan war, chiefly on account of the impossible narrative interwoven therewith, about a certain Achilles being the son of a sea-goddess Thetis and of a man Peleus, or Sarpedon being the son of Zeus, or Ascalaphus and Ialmenus the sons of Ares, or AEneas that of Aphrodite, how should we prove that such was the case, especially under the weight of the fiction attached, I know not how, to the universally prevalent opinion that there was really a war in Ilium between Greeks and Trojans? And suppose, also, that some one disbelieved the story of OEdipus and Jocasta, and of their two sons Eteocles and Polynices, because the sphinx, a kind of half-virgin, was introduced into the narrative, how should we demonstrate the reality of such a thing? And in like manner also with the history of the Epigoni, although there is no such marvellous event interwoven with it, or with the return of the Heracleidae, or countless other historical events. But he who deals candidly with histories, and would wish to keep himself also from being imposed upon by them, will exercise his judgment as to what statements he will give his assent to, and what he will accept figuratively, seeking to discover the meaning of the authors of such inventions, and from what statements he will withhold his belief, as having been written for the gratification of certain individuals. And we have said this by way of anticipation respecting the whole history related in the Gospels concerning Jesus, not as inviting men of acuteness to a simple and unreasoning faith, but wishing to show that there is need of candour in those who are to read, and of much investigation, and, so to speak, of insight into the meaning of the writers, that the object with which each event has been recorded may be discovered.

Origen then writes in De Principiis Book IV
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04124.htm

But, that our meaning may be ascertained by the facts themselves, let us examine the passages of Scripture. Now who is there, pray, possessed of understanding, that will regard the statement as appropriate, that the first day, and the second, and the third, in which also both evening and morning are mentioned, existed without sun, and moon, and stars— the first day even without a sky? And who is found so ignorant as to suppose that God, as if He had been a husbandman, planted trees in paradise, in Eden towards the east, and a tree of life in it, i.e., a visible and palpable tree of wood, so that anyone eating of it with bodily teeth should obtain life, and, eating again of another tree, should come to the knowledge of good and evil? No one, I think, can doubt that the statement that God walked in the afternoon in paradise, and that Adam lay hid under a tree, is related figuratively in Scripture, that some mystical meaning may be indicated by it. The departure of Cain from the presence of the Lord will manifestly cause a careful reader to inquire what is the presence of God, and how anyone can go out from it. But not to extend the task which we have before us beyond its due limits, it is very easy for anyone who pleases to gather out of holy Scripture what is recorded indeed as having been done, but what nevertheless cannot be believed as having rea­sonably and appropriately occurred according to the historical account. The same style of Scriptural narrative occurs abundantly in the Gospels, as when the devil is said to have placed Jesus on a lofty mountain, that he might show Him from thence all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them. How could it literally come to pass, either that Jesus should be led up by the devil into a high mountain, or that the latter should show him all the kingdoms of the world (as if they were lying beneath his bodily eyes, and adjacent to one mountain), i.e., the king­doms of the Persians, and Scythians, and Indians? Or how could he show in what manner the kings of these kingdoms are glorified by men? And many other instances similar to this will be found in the Gospels by anyone who will read them with atten­tion, and will observe that in those narratives which appear to be literally recorded, there are inserted and interwoven things which cannot be admitted his­torically, but which may be accepted in a spiritual signification.

One might be able to propose some kind of 5th dimensional chess is being played, but it seems unlikely.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Heresiology before 325 CE has been forged: NT Apocryphal literature is a Post-Nicene reaction to the NT Bible.

Post by MrMacSon »

duplicated
Last edited by MrMacSon on Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply