Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Eusebius in the 4th century did not need to use a time machine to travel 300 years into the past to recover the letter exchange between Jesus H. Christ and King Abgar. Eusebius discovered this stuff in the Syriac archives of Origen's Theological library.

Pseudo-Isidore in the 9th century did not need to use a time machine to travel 800 years into the past to recover truckloads of letter exchanges between Christian bishops of the 1st to the 3rd centuries. Pseudo-Isidore discovered this stuff in the church archives of Corbie Abbey.

John de Medici (Pope Leo X) in the 16th century did not need a time machine to travel almost one and a half millennia into the past and procure new manuscript copies of Tacitus Annals. He simply increased the price of rewards to persons who could recover such stuff. Along came Angelo Arcomboldi, Pope Leo X's "Thesaurum Quaestor Pontificius" ("steward", "receiver", or "collector") who discovered the manuscripts of Tacitus Annals in the archives of the Vatican library.

Until the subject of fraud and forgery is brought to the foreground any reconstruction of Christian origins will be entirely superficial. The proposition that Irenaeus has been forged by the church industry in order to promote the agenda of the church industry of the later 4th and subsequent centuries is of course a conspiracy theory. Anyone who thinks that the church industry did not conspire to tender a pseudo-historical account of its origins has no understanding of political history.

schillingklaus wrote: ↑Sun Jul 17, 2022 9:45 am There is absolutely no historical legitimacy to apostolic succession except in the fantasy of apologistic scholars.

When we ask which literary source is responsible for their fantasy they cite Irenaeus. The entire benefit of the notion of apostolic succession came to the foreground with the rise of the Roman Latin church under Pontifex Maximus Damasus. Damasus was very interested in the notion of Apostolic succession and the primacy of the Roman church industry because he gained a great deal by the invention of the fantasy.

Eusebius in the 4th century did not need to use a time machine to travel 300 years into the past to recover the letter exchange between Jesus H. Christ and King Abgar.

How do you know your fourth century inventors of Christianity weren't space aliens?

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Sun Jul 17, 2022 4:42 pm

Eusebius in the 4th century did not need to use a time machine to travel 300 years into the past to recover the letter exchange between Jesus H. Christ and King Abgar.

How do you know your fourth century inventors of Christianity weren't space aliens?

The 4th century inventors of orthodoxy stipulated at the Synod of Laodicea that the heretics were the aliens. The Christians stipulated that the non-Christians did not belong on the planet and set about exterminating non Christians.


It was in the 4th century and no earlier that Councils and Synods were being held by the orthodoxy in order to proscribe the heretics and the reading of "the uncanonical books". We can see this in Athanasius' festal letter:


The orthodoxy was highly agitated by the NT apocryphal literature circulating in the 4th century. You and everyone of the mainstream persuasion accept, on the basis of Irenaeus and others, that at least some of the NT apocryphal literature pre-existed Constantine's widespread circulation of the NT Bible codex. I think the church industry lied. I am pointing out a blind spot. Heresy and discussion of measures against it (such as all the councils and synods) only makes sense when there is an orthodoxy. The NT Apocryphal corpus is best explained as a literary reaction to the NT and LXX super-codex.

The 4th century inventors of orthodoxy stipulated at the Synod of Laodicea that the heretics were the aliens.

I specifically said SPACE aliens i.e. extraterrestrials. This is the problem with your theory. You decide what crazy you want to allow into your parallel universe. You draw the line on space aliens. But really, why is adding space aliens to the mix any more crazy than saying Christianity didn't exist. You're really engaging in an egoistic exercise to get the world to bow down before YOUR taste and YOUR prejudices. But if you are going to open the door to an invented Christianity the idea that space aliens were responsible for creating the new religion has a lot going for them.

1. how did the Romans all agree to follow a religion that never existed before Constantine? Well if space aliens were behind the new religion it's now perfectly understandable. They flew down in their shiny flying saucers in front of crowds of people in the Coliseum - maybe the Coliseum was completely packed with eye-witnesses. And they were all amazed at this advanced civilization and when they heard about Christianity and Jesus they said 'well if they can invent flying spaceships maybe they also know a thing or too about religion. There must have been this 'Jesus Christ' they are talking about after all they came all the way here from another planet.' In this way, the conversion of Romans and citizens of other urban centers was a lot like the conversion of barbaric people outside of the Roman Empire - viz. they were impressed by the technological advancement of the civilization bringing 'glad tidings' about Christ rather than the historicity of Jesus.
2. the importance of angels in early Christianity. Angels are from the sublunar realm. One of the more unusual things about Christianity is the role that angels played in the history of the world. If you were a pagan you'd have to believe that (a) flying outer space beings were responsible for destroying Babel (b) 'angels' came down had babies with humans causing the flood (c) angels visited with all the Patriarchs (d) angels came down at the birth of Jesus etc. How was this widely accepted? The answer: space aliens weren't just in the Bible but the inventors of the Bible. You just have to make the next step which you refuse to take.

The problem Pete is that YOU happen to downplay the role that aliens undoubtedly had in the invention of early Christianity which you assume occurred in the 4th century. That's your taste. But it should be more about you. It should be about the search for answers and the truth. You should stop letting your prejudices get in the way of letting people know that space aliens established Christianity under Constantine. Stop being so egotistical.

Perhaps we should extend space aliens all the way back to Genesis 1:1. They first terraformed and then brought life here.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Jul 18, 2022 8:04 am But really, why is adding space aliens to the mix any more crazy than saying Christianity didn't exist.

If you go back and read the OP (especially point 5) you will see that the OP is not arguing that the cult did not exist. The OP argues that the NT apocryphal writings (and the related heresiological writings - Irenaeus et al) did not exist before 325 CE until Constantine published the NT (canonical) literature as a political instrument in the Roman empire.

The OP allows that the NT canonical literature could have been from the 1st century. The OP even allows that Jesus H. Christ could have been historical. The OP allows the existence of Peter, Paul and Mary, Marcion, Hegesippus and Philip the Arab as Christians prior to Constantine.

What the OP is arguing is that no matter how you view the historicity of the canonical literature and its auspicious cult of Christians, the apocryphal literature (and heresiology - the reaction of the orthodoxy to the NT apocrypha) did not exist prior to the widespread circulation of the NT (canonical) bible codices c.325 CE. It was a reaction to it.

I am happy to leave the Jesus in Outer Space with the space aliens and Richard Carrier. We can assume that the apostle John wrote the Gospel of John in the 1st century. The OP is arguing that the story about the apostle John resurrecting a smoked fish (in the Acts of John) is a story written by a seditious heretic from this side of the Nicene Council.

The proposition in the OP is that the Arian controversy was actually about an avalanche of NT apocryphal literature and the orthodoxy invented heresiology in order to retro-script this controversy out of the epoch in which the NT Bible was first circulated as a political instrument, and into prior centuries. Irenaeus et al are pseudo historical fabrications. No matter if Jesus and the NT canonical literature are historical.

The OP argues that the NT apocryphal writings (and the related heresiological writings - Irenaeus et al) did not exist before 325 CE until Constantine published the NT (canonical) literature as a political instrument in the Roman empire.

Why couldn't space aliens have been responsible for the invention of the New Testament canon? What evidence do you have that there were fourth century HUMAN inventors of Christianity rather than extraterrestrials?