Arius was a Platonist philosopher who wrote Secret John

[Leucius Charinus]

Likewise for all other heretics: did they ever return the favour dealt them by the FF?
No? Why not. Yes? Then what happened to it

No they didn't return that favor. Why not? Because it never existed.

IMHO the very first heretic was Arius of Alexandria c.325 CE. Arius was not a Christian as reported by the Nicene Church. Arius was a Platonist philosopher. Constantine explicitly refers to the followers of Arius as "Porphyrians".

Comparing the words of Jesus from “The Secret Book of John”
in the NHL to the words of Arius from “Thalia”
https://www.academia.edu/44862334/_The_ ... nd_Thalia_

(Also see Paul the Uncertain (above)- Arius shot back by Bart Ehrman)

The Christian victors over the pagan philosophers fabricated their own corrupted version of the history of the conflict. Ante Nicene heresiology has been fabricated by the powerful Post Nicene church community (I wont use the term industry) in order to obscure the massive literary controversy that was precipitated when the Jesus (NT) and Adam and Eve (LXX) Story Book was packaged, circulated and received in codex form by the literate Greeks in the eastern empire. They gave it the thumbs down. That's when the shit hit the fan.

Do we have evidence that the Greeks ridiculed, satirised and rejected the Holy Bible? Yes IMO we do have such evidence:

(1) Eusebius: "most shameful ridicule of the unbelievers"

"the sacred matters of inspired teaching
were exposed to the most shameful ridicule
in the very theaters of the unbelievers".

Eusebius, "Life of Constantine", Ch. LXI
How Controversies originated at Alexandria
through Matters relating to Arius


(2) Athanasius: The Greeks derided the mystery that the Christians adored

That mystery the Jews traduce, the Greeks deride, but we adore;

Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, Chapter 1 - Creation and the Fall


(3) Emperor Julian: Writes a satire against Jesus and Constantine, and in three books "Against the Christians"

"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind
the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians
is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.
Though it has in it nothing divine,
by making full use of that part of the soul
which loves fable and is childish and foolish,
it has induced men to believe
that the monstrous tale is truth."


(4) Cyril: "Against Julian"

"rebuts this Greek eyebrow raised against the glory of Christ"

("Greek eyebrow" = satire)

[Peter Kirby]

You're encouraged to keep posting about your theories, but they are split off a little more cleanly than most theories just due to the way they have had a tendency to take over threads, in opposition to nearly everyone else who wants to post. Maybe this is because you're right and everyone else is wrong - no judgment is implied about that. You're also able to comment in general (as you have many times recently) without being split off. In any case, this discussion can continue better with separate threads.

[mlinssen]

You're encouraged to keep posting about your theories, but they are split off a little more cleanly than most theories just due to the way they have had a tendency to take over threads, in opposition to nearly everyone else who wants to post. Maybe this is because you're right and everyone else is wrong - no judgment is implied about that. You're also able to comment in general (as you have many times recently) without being split off. In any case, this discussion can continue better with separate threads.

I'm unsure you should encourage Pete for the way in which his completely irrelevant comments entirely derail threads, only to spotlight his convoluted ramblings about "it" being fabricated, etc

Thanks for the split Peter

[mlinssen]

Likewise for all other heretics: did they ever return the favour dealt them by the FF?
No? Why not. Yes? Then what happened to it

No they didn't return that favor. Why not? Because it never existed.

IMHO the very first heretic was Arius of Alexandria c.325 CE. Arius was not a Christian as reported by the Nicene Church. Arius was a Platonist philosopher. Constantine explicitly refers to the followers of Arius as "Porphyrians".

Apart from the issue that Justin Martyr is dated to 150-ish and thus precedes this Arius by two centuries, did Arius refute Constantine back?

Oh wait he did, Paul the Uncertain already said so before Peter thankfully split it after that you added the usual "hey look at my theory!" rubbish. I clicked the link you provided which leads to a paper on your academia.edu profile - I must say that it is completely devoid of anything useful; it doesn't say anything, it doesn't prove anything, there's nothing on the left that even remotely relates that that on the right

It's utter trash Pete, you're just Roman Piso-ing your way through there. Why haven't you emphasised text, put in an introduction, conclusion?

Oh and by the way, I'll leave you to this thread: it's all yours

[Leucius Charinus]

Likewise for all other heretics: did they ever return the favour dealt them by the FF?
No? Why not. Yes? Then what happened to it

No they didn't return that favor. Why not? Because it never existed.

Apart from the issue that Justin Martyr is dated to 150-ish and thus precedes this Arius by two centuries

about "it" being fabricated,

You defined the "it". The "it" are the writings of the refutors such as Justin.

The issue here is that the earliest extant manuscript for Justin is from the 14th century. We do not have any earlier manuscripts. The existence of Justin and any of his manuscripts in the mid 2nd century is entirely hypothetical.

I am skeptical that either Justin or his manuscripts existed in the 2nd century and have argued that both were fabricated somewhere between the later 4th century and the 14th century.

The existence of It - the refutors - the heresiologists like Justin were IMO fabricated by the later church. In general terms the FF are later fabrications.

And BTW any reconstruction of Marcion's gospel relies on the supposition that the manuscripts of Justin and Irenaeus and Hippolytus (dated in the 14th, 12th and 14th centuries respectively) are legitimate representations from the 2nd century.

Good luck with that.