Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To Justin Martyr, the terms 'Memoirs of the apostles', and 'Gospels' were synonymous terms as shown by his statement in his first Apology;
JUSTIN MARTYR -- THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.
For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone.
Again, without exception, the testimony of the early church is that the Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. And I shown that the Gospels were quoted by Clement of Rome and Polycarp.
The church fathers quoted the apostles without deferring to you as to how they should have framed their quotes.
Look. Scholars recognize that the four Gospels were written in the first century. Your claim that the Gospels weren't written until much later is bogus and not supported by scholarship.
By the way, the titles attached to the Gospels is not ''The Gospel according to _____,'' but simply ''According to _____'' as can be seen on Codex Sinaiticus. κατα μαθθαιον (According to Matthew), κατα μαρκον (According to Mark), κατα λουκαν (According to Luke), κατα ϊωαννην (According to John).
Your attempts to affix a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th century date to the writing of the Gospels has no merit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense
First of all, there was NO uniform Christian church until the 4th century and the formation of the Catholic church by the order of emperor Constantine. Prior to that Christianity was undergoing heavy persecution and was being practiced in secret. During the period from the late 1st century until the early 4th century, the "church" was nothing more than a loose organization of groups who considered themselves followers of Jesus. There was no uniform doctrine or dogma, no uniformly accepted NT, and no physical churches. Christian beliefs varied wildly. The violent hostility between competing groups of Christians that manifested itself after Constantine legalized Christianity in the 4th century was the cause for Constantine to order the creation of a universal (catholic) doctrine, which served as the founding point of the Catholic church.
"About 187 Irenaeus listed twenty varieties of Christianity; about 384 Epiphanius counted eighty." ("The Story of Civilization Vol. 3 - Caesar And Christ," Pg. 616, by Will Durant.)
You can't seem to stay on topic. Your reply to my post has no relationship to my post.
I'm done with this thread at any rate. Thrillobyte's claims have no validity. You people can prattle on to your heart's content.
They aren't Christians. I don't know what to call them, but if they bear no resemblance to Christ (Jesus), then they don't count. I could call myself a Birdman, but if I don't resemble a bird and can't fly, the label is meaningless. You not only naively believe the label without further verification, but you also take it a step further and direct the fraud against the represented system.
A scammer falsely misrepresenting a hospital doesn't make that hospital a criminal organization, but that's your logic.
Then we need to correct the inaccurate statistics that christians keep pushing on us that apparently do not reflect the true numbers of christians in the world...at least according to you.
Millions belong to churches that use those tactics.
They aren't Christians. I don't know what to call them, but if they bear no resemblance to Christ (Jesus), then they don't count. I could call myself a Birdman, but if I don't resemble a bird and can't fly, the label is meaningless. You not only naively believe the label without further verification, but you also take it a step further and direct the fraud against the represented system.
A scammer falsely misrepresenting a hospital doesn't make that hospital a criminal organization, but that's your logic.
How exactly is anyone to judge who "bears resemblance to Christ (Jesus)?" Jesus left nothing written in his own hand which would serve to establish his actual intentions or identity. All that exists are documents written by others years after Jesus was executed, who, much like Paul, never actually knew Jesus. A person may choose to call themself a Christian, but that designation is based on assumption and tradition. Every Christian naively believes that THEY are the living embodiment of Jesus. But Jesus was lost centuries ago; buried under centuries of unverifiable assumptions and unfounded traditions.
You can't seem to stay on topic. Your reply to my post has no relationship to my post.
I'm done with this thread at any rate. Thrillobyte's claims have no validity. You people can prattle on to your heart's content.
You always seem to be quickly "done with a thread" when you are confronted with information which serves to dispute your assertions. In military parlance it's known as charging to the rear. We non military types simply call it running away.
You always seem to be quickly "done with a thread" when you are confronted with information which serves to dispute your assertions. In military parlance it's known as charging to the rear. We non military types simply call it running away.
You always seem to be quickly "done with a thread" when you are confronted with information which serves to dispute your assertions. In military parlance it's known as charging to the rear. We non military types simply call it running away.
Disagreements abound. That's to be expected. But you people have repeatedly shown yourselves to be closed minded, and no amount of discussion is going to change that. Nor are the arguments on this forum to back your views very good. I've made my case regarding the first century dating of the gospels which is the issue at hand on this thread and I'm backed by scholarship. I will leave it at that.
And your post to me wasn't even on the topic. I'm not inclined to go down rabbit trails just because you want to. And so I leave this thread to you people to do your usual thing.
You can't seem to stay on topic. Your reply to my post has no relationship to my post.
I'm done with this thread at any rate. Thrillobyte's claims have no validity. You people can prattle on to your heart's content.
And just when it was starting to get good!
Mike gets caught in another "hold up a duck egg, swear it's from his hen-house" statement. Let's look at it:
I challenged Mike, "Mike, did Justin Martyr ever quote from 'Memoirs of the Apostles' and say, 'By the way, these verses I quote from Memoirs of the Apostles are actually from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John but it's easier just to refer to them as Memoirs.' "
And here's what he threw back at us, actually believing we'd be dumb enough to buy this con:
Quote:
In post #44 I quoted Justin Martyr's statement in which he equated the term 'Memoirs of the Apostles' and the term 'Gospels' I even bolded it so that you couldn't miss it. I'll post it again.
JUSTIN MARTYR -- THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.
For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone.
Saint Justin Martyr: First Apology (Roberts-Donaldson)
Justin very clearly states that the memoirs composed by the apostles are called Gospels.
Check out the bold above. The term "memoirs" is just a generic term having to do with the remembrances, recollections, and reminiscences of the apostles which Justin states the apostles called "gospels" or "good news". This has nothing to do with the actual document "Memoirs of the Apostles"
Quote:
A number of the passages in Justin that purportedly correspond to New Testament scriptures come from a text called "Memoirs of the Apostles," which, Cassels shows, is a book by that title,NOT a reference to several "memoirs" or apostolic gospels.
The "Memoirs," in other words," constitutes a single text-like the "Acts of the Apostles."
Upon examination, the quotes Justin uses from the Memoirs "differ more or less widely" from parallel scriptures in the synoptics, Matthew, Mark and Luke.
As confirmed by Tischendorf, only a couple of short exceptions are sufficiently similar to warrant comparison with the synoptic gospels. These various passages from the Memoirs or "Memorabilia" are repeated often enough that it is clear Justin is quoting them verbatim, rather than paraphrasing; yet,
they are not identical to gospel scriptures, differing enough that they could not have come from those books. "There is almost invariably some difference," says Keeler "either in sense or construction, showing that Justin's book was different from our Gospels."
Also, several of the Memoirs scriptures do not appear in any form in the canonical gospels. Moreover, Justin 's version of the gospel tale and the Church history in its details is different from and contradictory to that found in the New Testament.
So Mike, when you quote Justin Martyr, "For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called gospels..." exactly which gospels are you referring to since Justin doesn't himself say which ones he's referring to and certainly the four canonical gospels hadn't even been chosen yet. As we saw from Tired of the Nonsense in his post No 56 there were dozens of them floating around in the time of Justin:
Quote:
Gospel of Thomas
Oxyrhynchus Gospels
Egerton Gospel
Fayyum Fragment
Dialogue of the Saviour
The Gospel of the Ebionites ("GE")
The Gospel of the Hebrews ("GH")
The Gospel of the Nazarenes
Gospel of the Ebionites
Gospel of the Hebrews
Gospel of the Nazoraeans
Secret Gospel of Mark
Gospel of Marcion
Gospel of Judas
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Marcion (mid 2nd century)
Gospel of Apelles (mid-late 2nd century)
Gospel of Basilides (mid 2nd century)
Gospel of Peter
Gospel of Nicodemus (also called the "Acts of Pilate")
Gospel of Bartholomew
Gospel of Judas (also called the "Gospel of Judas Iscariot")
Gospel of Mary (also called the "Gospel of Mary Magdalene")
Gospel of Philip
Greek Gospel of the Egyptians (distinct from the Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians)
Gospel of Truth
Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter (distinct from the Apocalypse of Peter)
Secret Gospel of John
Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians (distinct from the Greek Gospel of the Egyptians)
So which ones is Justin referring to, Mike?
I think it's pretty clear that Mike knew this volume entitled "Memoirs of the Apostles" was a completely separate source from the gospels and yet he tried to put it over on us that it and the gospels were synonymous.
Really, Mike! I thought better of you integrity-wise. For shame! For shame!
Last edited by thrillobyte; 01-11-2019 at 09:43 PM..
It doesn't matter to Mike. All that is important to him is that if the Church fathers say it's true then it's true. Almost all of his arguments are based on...'A group of very biased and financially/politically motivated men say it is all true and that's good enough for me.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
I'm done with this thread at any rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424
I hear you. It's beyond nonsensical. Let the babblers chatter on in their echo chamber. Knock yourselves out.
Yay! Another two Christians flounce back their hair before running for the hills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Disagreements abound. That's to be expected. But you people have repeatedly shown yourselves to be closed minded, and no amount of discussion is going to change that.
...and of course, you never see yourself like that do you? You also say that you're 'done' after nearly every discussion you get involved in...and then come back again on the next discussion, about the same subject, with the same people.
Disagreements abound. That's to be expected. But you people have repeatedly shown yourselves to be closed minded, and no amount of discussion is going to change that. Nor are the arguments on this forum to back your views very good. I've made my case regarding the first century dating of the gospels which is the issue at hand on this thread and I'm backed by scholarship. I will leave it at that.
And your post to me wasn't even on the topic. I'm not inclined to go down rabbit trails just because you want to. And so I leave this thread to you people to do your usual thing.
I was raised Christian. I became an atheist by default when I reached the conclusion that Christianity contained far to many unrealistic and absurd claims to possess any realistic chance of being valid. I concluded that scientific observation shows far more promise in pointing we humans in the right factual direction. Science requires work, because often the answers prove not to be either readily obvious or intuitive. And science requires patience, because the evidence must be laboriously gathered and studied. Which inhibits immediate gratification. Religion on the other hand is founded on dogmatic declaration, which declares that things are a certain unalterable way.
The bottom line here is that I have considered and understand BOTH sides of the argument. I have reached an informed conclusion.Which is the very opposite of being closed minded.
But run away if you like. Whether you choose to stay and be discredited on a point by point basis, or choose to be discredited by your obvious inability to defend your unrealistic and absurd claims, the result is the same.
You lose! And your defeat is public.
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense; 01-12-2019 at 01:27 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
