It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Marcion invent Paul the ''apostle"?

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2016 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: CB328

Yes, Paul knows nothing about Jesus because whoever wrote under that name never knew him or his life and made up a bunch of crap to denounce Judaism.

Sounds like Marcion to me.


And yet Paul's theology is based on the sin offering and the appropriation of that sin offering by Jesus the lamb of God.
Marcion was very anti Jewish-God so why would he create a fictitious person who based their theology on very Jewish ideas?




posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 06:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
Justin never quotes from the Gospels or any of the NT but what he calls ''Memoirs of the apostles" and the Old Testament, usually the OT.


Justin Martyr (died c. 165 C.E.) in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (XLIX), used the expression “it is written” when quoting from Matthew, in the same way the Gospels themselves do when referring to the Hebrew Scriptures. The same is also true in an earlier anonymous work, “The Epistle of Barnabas” (IV). Justin Martyr in “The First Apology” (LXVI, LXVII) calls the “memoirs of the apostles” “Gospels.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186.
...
The canonicity of certain individual books of the Christian Greek Scriptures has been disputed by some, but the arguments against them are very weak. For critics to reject, for example, the book of Hebrews simply because it does not bear Paul’s name and because it differs slightly in style from his other letters is shallow reasoning. B. F. Westcott observed that “the canonical authority of the Epistle is independent of its Pauline authorship.” (The Epistle to the Hebrews, 1892, p. lxxi) Objection on the grounds of unnamed writership is far outweighed by the presence of Hebrews in the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P⁠46) (dated within 150 years of Paul’s death), which contains it along with eight other letters of Paul.

Sometimes the canonicity of small books such as James, Jude, Second and Third John, and Second Peter is questioned on the grounds that these books are quoted very little by early writers. However, they make up all together only one thirty-sixth of the Christian Greek Scriptures and were therefore less likely to be referred to. In this connection it may be observed that Second Peter is quoted by Irenaeus as bearing the same evidence of canonicity as the rest of the Greek Scriptures. The same is true of Second John. (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 551, 557, 341, 443, “Irenaeus Against Heresies”) Revelation, also rejected by some, was attested to by many early commentators, including Papias, Justin Martyr, Melito, and Irenaeus.

The real test of canonicity, however, is not how many times or by what nonapostolic writer a certain book has been quoted. The contents of the book itself must give evidence that it is a product of holy spirit. Consequently, it cannot contain superstitions or demonism, nor can it encourage creature worship. It must be in total harmony and complete unity with the rest of the Bible, thus supporting the authorship of Jehovah God. Each book must conform to the divine “pattern of healthful words” and be in harmony with the teachings and activities of Christ Jesus. (2Ti 1:13; 1Co 4:17) The apostles clearly had divine accreditation and they spoke in attestation of such other writers as Luke and James, the half brother of Jesus. By holy spirit the apostles had “discernment of inspired utterances” as to whether such were of God or not. (1Co 12:4, 10) With the death of John, the last apostle, this reliable chain of divinely inspired men came to an end, and so with the Revelation, John’s Gospel, and his epistles, the Bible canon closed.

The 66 canonical books of our Bible in their harmonious unity and balance testify to the oneness and completeness of the Bible and recommend it to us as indeed Jehovah’s Word of inspired truth, preserved until now against all its enemies. (1Pe 1:25)


Outside the Scriptures themselves there is evidence that, as early as 90-100 C.E., at least ten of Paul’s letters were collected together.

...

Source: Canon: Insight, Volume 1

Details about that last subject can be found on the webpage above but some of them have already been dismissed in this thread and elsewhere with convenient excuses ('not authentic' usually, or something similar, 'not contemporary evidence', etc.), so do whatever you feel like with the information. It's not evidence that's tickling your ears anyway, so you can't cherrypick and twist it to make it sound like it's supporting your philosophy/idea and story about history related to biblical events and persons mentioned in the bible.
One of the comments here in response to something mentioned about Clement if I remember correctly (the 'not contempary' mixed with 'not authentic'/'not reliable'/'unknown authorship'-excuse) sounds like these guys from the Atheist Experience show about whether or not Jesus existed (just switch out "Jesus" with "Paul" and you have the same arguments followed by the same excuses when presented with evidence that demonstrates these arguments to be false and/or deceptive in this thread; well, I guess if Paul never existed because he was invented by Marcion it wasn't Paul that invented Christianity as the other claim goes, you can't have it both ways Mr. Bible Critic). At 2:13 and again towards the end:

edit on 25-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Your quote claims Justin quoted Matthew but never said when or what quote.

It's a common tactic, but the fact that Justin never used the term Gospel or the name of Matthew means he could not have quoted him.

And didn't quote any Gospel, but an entirely different document and the OT more often than that, which is not Matthew, called Matthew or claimed to be by any non hack.

Quite lame actually, to take a document called by Justin "Memoirs of the apostles" and the fact that a quote may be shared by the two and say he quoted Matthew.

No. Sorry. Didn't happen.

But I am not surprised that an attempt to argue that he did, without supplying the quote, would be used to fool people who generally don't read things for themselves and rely on the "research" of other likely Christians, and think that a valid counter has been supplied for the factual statement "Justin never quotes from the Gospels but "Memoirs of the apostles."

But you have not shown Justin quoting from or even mentioning a Gospel or even just Matthew.

And that is because HE JUST DOESN'T.
edit on 25-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 03:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: whereislogic

Your quote claims Justin quoted Matthew but never said when or what quote.

However, someone who cares about honesty and truthful/accurate information about history rather than making a case for their own version of history and finding excuses for any facts that contradict their own claims, might have noticed that my comment mentioned where you can find Justin doing exactly what was described (or the research that was already put into this by the ones who wrote The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186). Quoting from earlier:

Justin Martyr (died c. 165 C.E.) in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (XLIX), used the expression “it is written” when quoting from Matthew, in the same way the Gospels themselves do when referring to the Hebrew Scriptures. The same is also true in an earlier anonymous work, “The Epistle of Barnabas” (IV). Justin Martyr in “The First Apology” (LXVI, LXVII) calls the “memoirs of the apostles” “Gospels.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186.

It took me less than a minute to google "Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew", search the first link and page for "it is written" and find:

For He appeared distasteful to you when He cried among you, 'It is written, My house is the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves!' He overthrew also the tables of the money-changers in the temple, and exclaimed, 'Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye pay tithe of mint and rue, but do not observe the love of God and justice. Ye whited sepulchres! appearing beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones.' And to the Scribes, 'Woe unto you, Scribes! for ye have the keys, and ye do not enter in yourselves, and them that are entering in ye hinder; ye blind guides!'

Source: Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho

Now that wasn't that hard was it? Let's just move the goalpost and pretend I need to find Justin using the name "Matthew" in order to justify the earlier statement made by the writers and scholars who put a lot of research, time and effort in writing The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Unlike certain other people just going: "nuh-uh". And pretend I wasn't responding to your erronuous/false and possibly intentionally deceptive claim that "Justin never quotes from the Gospels or any of the NT...". Which I've demonstrated to be incorrect/false without having to give all the details that are easily found using google these days for anyone truly thirsting for knowledge (I gave you all the leads you need to demonstrate you're a genuine truth seeker and not someone selling their own version of history and in denial of the actual historical facts and research that has already gone into this, a total disregard for established history and historical documentation and evidence; while hypocritically and ironically appealing to such historical documentation as evidence for their version of history as they do their cherrypicking thing that is so common amongst fans of evolutionary philosophies and Trinitarians as well, ignore everything that contradicts their version of reality, cherrypick, twist and tell half-truths regarding things that can be made to sound like it's supporting their version of reality; standard propaganda and its effects on the victims who desperately try to hang on to it and argue in favor of it).

I'll leave the research regarding Justin's work The First Apology up to whoever truly wants to figure out the truth of this matter rather than just stick with whatever view of history tickles their ears, pleases them most. You don't need someone spoonfeeding you everything, that's already been done and being done by others.

Btw, before the unreasonable nitpicking and twisting of logic and distractions away from what I've actually just demonstrated begin again, which was primarily focussed on the quotation of Matthew 21:13 and some verses of Matthew 23, the phrase "it is written" is used multiple times by Justin in "Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew", not just in the quotation of Matthew 21:13 (where Jesus also says "it is written"). That was just the first instance and nicely demonstrated Justin quoting from Matthew, which is a response to your erronuous claim. The phrase "it is written" is not that important regarding that point, but it does demonstrate an interesting detail.

Ah whatever, since it's so quick to do anyway, here's some more spoonfeeding for ye:

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels,...

Source: Justin, The First Apology, ch. 66, try this link+search. Again, just the first link showing up in google and just mentioning the first instance of the word "gospels". 1 mention is enough regarding your half-truths and twisted misrepresentation and possible misunderstanding of that subject (just trying to make clear that I don't blame you for anything, it is logical that if one misunderstands something that one ends up misrepresenting something, but a lot more is involved here, see end of this comment; also just basically saying you're wrong and justifying why I'm saying that and why I recognize deception and self-deception being involved here, it's meant as a heads-up for you as well as those who see any merit in your version of history or myths/false stories, not an accusation or slander, otherwise it's more common for people who do the latter to just leave it at that and not go to so much trouble explaining why someone is deceived and ends up deceiving others, inadvertently or advertently). And the first claim of the OP (the first sentence) also isn't true depending on what a person understands with the term "the Christian Church", or how a person may want to interpret that terminology (making it perfect for capitalizing on the ambiguity of language and a reason for me to skip it as not to get dragged into a useless debate about what "the Christian Church" is; especially with someone who won't even be reasonable about such a simple to refute claim regarding Justin that I've discussed now, and easy to discover on your own that it's false when a person wants to avoid spreading falsehoods and/or appearing dishonest or completely unreasonable about these subjects).

Funny coincidence, the quotation Justin used from Matthew is very appropiate regarding where people take their teachings and information from on ATS, so also appropiate for this thread, as I may have mentioned before, your trust is misplaced.
edit on 26-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik
edit previous comment: quotations Justin used...

Let God be found true, even if every man be found a liar.

Ever heard that phrase before? It is also describing a phenomena that one can verify when observing the claims of bible critics and critics or opposers of Jehovah God when it comes to the bible and the history related to it. It is very widespread as the bible explains itself, see for example my thread:
Guard against being deceived
Or any of my other threads for specific examples.
edit on 26-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic
a reply to: SethTsaddik
edit previous comment: quotations Justin used...

Let God be found true, even if every man be found a liar.

Ever heard that phrase before? It is also describing a phenomena that one can verify when observing the claims of bible critics and critics or opposers of Jehovah God when it comes to the bible and the history related to it. It is very widespread as the bible explains itself, see for example my thread:
Guard against being deceived
Or any of my other threads for specific examples.


Edit however you wish.

I don't see what anything in this comment has to do with Marcion being the likely author of the Pauline epistles.

You should have checked your sources before quoting someone who lied, because we both know that Justin didn't quote the Gospels.

Now anyway. A day ago you fully believed whoever you quoted was correct and didn't fact check it, though it would have taken less than 5 minutes.

It doesn't change the fact that I already knew Justin Martyr never quoted any Gospel, or used the term Gospel, never names an apostle.

Or that in haste you relied on another's words, words that were not true and falsley claimed Justin quoted Matthew.

Had you done a little research instead you could have prevented yourself from agreeing blindly with a statement that you don't know whether or not is true.

Because as you know now, it isn't true at all. And the only point for this comment seems to be to distract from that blunder.

No big deal, just don't rely on other people to do what you are fully capable of doing yourself, like reading a book. Even just a quick Google search would have sufficed.

Because unfortunately Christianity has a lot of liars. What religion or institution doesn't?

Next time you don't have to get burnt by a liar posing as scholarly.

I actually would never have said Justin never quoted the Gospels if I wasn't certain it was true. I am too careful for that.
edit on 26-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: whereislogic

Your quote claims Justin quoted Matthew but never said when or what quote.

However, someone who cares about honesty and truthful/accurate information about history rather than making a case for their own version of history and finding excuses for any facts that contradict their own claims, might have noticed that my comment mentioned where you can find Justin doing exactly what was described (or the research that was already put into this by the ones who wrote The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186). Quoting from earlier:

Justin Martyr (died c. 165 C.E.) in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (XLIX), used the expression “it is written” when quoting from Matthew, in the same way the Gospels themselves do when referring to the Hebrew Scriptures. The same is also true in an earlier anonymous work, “The Epistle of Barnabas” (IV). Justin Martyr in “The First Apology” (LXVI, LXVII) calls the “memoirs of the apostles” “Gospels.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186.

It took me less than a minute to google "Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew", search the first link and page for "it is written" and find:

For He appeared distasteful to you when He cried among you, 'It is written, My house is the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves!' He overthrew also the tables of the money-changers in the temple, and exclaimed, 'Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye pay tithe of mint and rue, but do not observe the love of God and justice. Ye whited sepulchres! appearing beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones.' And to the Scribes, 'Woe unto you, Scribes! for ye have the keys, and ye do not enter in yourselves, and them that are entering in ye hinder; ye blind guides!'

Source: Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho

Now that wasn't that hard was it? Let's just move the goalpost and pretend I need to find Justin using the name "Matthew" in order to justify the earlier statement made by the writers and scholars who put a lot of research, time and effort in writing The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Unlike certain other people just going: "nuh-uh". And pretend I wasn't responding to your erronuous/false and possibly intentionally deceptive claim that "Justin never quotes from the Gospels or any of the NT...". Which I've demonstrated to be incorrect/false without having to give all the details that are easily found using google these days for anyone truly thirsting for knowledge (I gave you all the leads you need to demonstrate you're a genuine truth seeker and not someone selling their own version of history and in denial of the actual historical facts and research that has already gone into this, a total disregard for established history and historical documentation and evidence; while hypocritically and ironically appealing to such historical documentation as evidence for their version of history as they do their cherrypicking thing that is so common amongst fans of evolutionary philosophies and Trinitarians as well, ignore everything that contradicts their version of reality, cherrypick, twist and tell half-truths regarding things that can be made to sound like it's supporting their version of reality; standard propaganda and its effects on the victims who desperately try to hang on to it and argue in favor of it).

I'll leave the research regarding Justin's work The First Apology up to whoever truly wants to figure out the truth of this matter rather than just stick with whatever view of history tickles their ears, pleases them most. You don't need someone spoonfeeding you everything, that's already been done and being done by others.

Btw, before the unreasonable nitpicking and twisting of logic and distractions away from what I've actually just demonstrated begin again, which was primarily focussed on the quotation of Matthew 21:13 and some verses of Matthew 23, the phrase "it is written" is used multiple times by Justin in "Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew", not just in the quotation of Matthew 21:13 (where Jesus also says "it is written"). That was just the first instance and nicely demonstrated Justin quoting from Matthew, which is a response to your erronuous claim. The phrase "it is written" is not that important regarding that point, but it does demonstrate an interesting detail.

Ah whatever, since it's so quick to do anyway, here's some more spoonfeeding for ye:

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels,...

Source: Justin, The First Apology, ch. 66, try this link+search. Again, just the first link showing up in google and just mentioning the first instance of the word "gospels". 1 mention is enough regarding your half-truths and twisted misrepresentation and possible misunderstanding of that subject (just trying to make clear that I don't blame you for anything, it is logical that if one misunderstands something that one ends up misrepresenting something, but a lot more is involved here, see end of this comment; also just basically saying you're wrong and justifying why I'm saying that and why I recognize deception and self-deception being involved here, it's meant as a heads-up for you as well as those who see any merit in your version of history or myths/false stories, not an accusation or slander, otherwise it's more common for people who do the latter to just leave it at that and not go to so much trouble explaining why someone is deceived and ends up deceiving others, inadvertently or advertently). And the first claim of the OP (the first sentence) also isn't true depending on what a person understands with the term "the Christian Church", or how a person may want to interpret that terminology (making it perfect for capitalizing on the ambiguity of language and a reason for me to skip it as not to get dragged into a useless debate about what "the Christian Church" is; especially with someone who won't even be reasonable about such a simple to refute claim regarding Justin that I've discussed now, and easy to discover on your own that it's false when a person wants to avoid spreading falsehoods and/or appearing dishonest or completely unreasonable about these subjects).

Funny coincidence, the quotation Justin used from Matthew is very appropiate regarding where people take their teachings and information from on ATS, so also appropiate for thive mentioned before, your trust is misplaced.


Half truths? Maybe you could provide a specific example of me being less than truthful if you are going to say such trash.

That was a lot of words, and very boring.

You still know that Justin Martyr didn't quote the Gospels and have no ability to change a historical fact, since that is what you are trying to do without actually doing it and are unable to back up your contention with any proof AND:

Since I already knew before making this thread that Justin never used the word Gospel or quoted from them, I have no reason to care.

If you can't produce the words of Justin Martyr actually doing what you claim he did, (but factually didn't) I quite simply rest my case.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
If you can't produce the words of Justin Martyr actually doing what you claim he did, (but factually didn't) I quite simply rest my case.

I just did. The denial is getting rather extreme or ridiculous now. I quoted from Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew (written by Justin quoting Matthew 21:13 and some verses from Matthew 23; all you need to do to verify is read my quotation from him and then read those verses in the bible). I also quoted from The First Apology, also written by Justin. You didn't even try to argue the excuse you used for Clement's works earlier, that it's not authentic or that these works are falsely attributed to Justin; something that wouldn't be much of an argument for anyone who knows a thing or two about history and these subjects in particular, but hey, still better than what you're doing now. Pretending you can't even see my quotations from Justin doing as described earlier.

Btw, I wasn't talking trash, I was very detailed about where you went wrong and how it wasn't a false accusation or slanderous, how I didn't blame you and didn't assume you know any better or are intentionally being dishonest and unreasonable about this. I did mention the possibility because of your denial regarding the historical evidence and documentation that demonstrates what I quoted from you to be false/incorrect/wrong or where it's misleading.
edit on 26-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

I am quite sure if you had supplied the words of Justin saying "Gospel of Matthew" instead of ''Memoirs of the apostles" and actually proven that he did, I would admit it.

I don't have to deny anything because it's already not true.

Justin never quoted from anything called "Gospel" of Matthew or anyone.

And you never showed me anything saying otherwise.

I know how to read. You aren't just going to claim he said something that he didn't and I will never have to deny anything of the sort.

Show me Justin Martyr SAYING "Gospel of Matthew" and tell me where in his writings it is and if it's there I'll concede.

Spoiler alert: It is not there.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Hell, he doesn't even use the words Gospel of Matthew and uses a document no longer extant called Memoirs of the apostles, in HIS WORDS.

Now I don't see how that leads you to incorrectly believe that it was Matthew he quoted from when he himself never mentioned Matthew or any Gospels.

You are right about one thing, the denial, it's you who is in denial though as "Gospel of Matthew" was not spoken of or quoted by Justin.

Which is why you have no simple quote to provide with location. Though you say you did you have not, you can't provide it.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik
Back to moving the goalpost and bringing up red herrings to distract from your claim in the OP that I was responding to (the reason I repeated it again a couple of comments ago, cause this debate game has patterns that are very recognizable and predictable; to pretend that somehow I now need to prove or show Justing saying something else than what would be enough to refute your claim from the OP or backup what was said in my first quotations).

So just for those who don't want to be distracted, your claim was:

Justin never quotes from the Gospels or any of the NT...

No talk about the term "Gospel of Matthew". I do not need to demonstrate Justin using the exact term "Gospel of Matthew" to refute that claim. All I need to do is point out where Justin quotes from what other people nowadays understand with the phrase "the Gospels or any of the NT". Which I did.
This is what I quoted about the subject:

Justin Martyr (died c. 165 C.E.) in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (XLIX), used the expression “it is written” when quoting from Matthew, in the same way the Gospels themselves do when referring to the Hebrew Scriptures. The same is also true in an earlier anonymous work, “The Epistle of Barnabas” (IV). Justin Martyr in “The First Apology” (LXVI, LXVII) calls the “memoirs of the apostles” “Gospels.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 220, 139, 185, 186.

And even though it isn't necessary for a person to be spoonfed the exact quotations to find out for themselves that the above is true, I still did. Then you come with your straw man argument that I somehow have to produce Justin saying "Gospel of Matthew" and if I can't, you're supposedly right and you can continue with your false claims and misrepresentations? Well, I can't stop you anyway.

Sigh, reasonable people are so hard to find these days, where are they? How can I trigger a reasonable/logical response to any of my comments and have a rational discussion even in disagreement? There are definitely different levels in unreasonable behaviour and commentary, and it's not that I have seen no reason/logic on ATS at all, but it's so rare. It's almost like a search for it is futile, and trying to influence it by attempts at encouraging the use of it is just as hard (and giving details regarding what is standing in the way doesn't seem to have much effect either, it just rubs people the wrong way if you want to give them a heads-up like that).
edit on 26-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Buddy I got the works of Justin bookmarked.

All you gotta do is say at what point he uses the term Gospel of Matthew and I can link it to the very page.

I don't see you doing that though. You keep changing the subject.

So, where in the works of Justin does he use the words Gospel of Matthew?

I will link it up in a minute if you are right. No problem with that whatsoever.

So...? Where?

Give me the chapter, I will link it up. If you are right you can prove it right now.
edit on 26-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Luckily it's in the public domain and anyone can use it.

Meaning in as much time as it takes me to get to this sight and type in the link is how long it will take to prove yourself right or wrong.

I will let you think it over.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
You keep changing the subject.

Nice pot calling the kettle black routine there (or psychological projection), what else is new around these parts...



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
You keep changing the subject.

Nice pot calling the kettle black routine there (or psychological projection), what else is new around these parts...


I don't even know what you mean but whatever.

And this is in itself changing the subject, btw.

I had moved on and I will give a link to the works of Justin Martyr as well as the entire volume 1 of the ante Nicene father's series of books where you will find Justin after Papias. And the apocryphal epistles Clement, Barnabas and Ignatius.

Happy reading! You really need a better attitude, it's not personal. You are just not correct if you think Justin quoted Matthew.

By all means, find out for yourself.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
You keep changing the subject.

Nice pot calling the kettle black routine there (or psychological projection), what else is new around these parts...


So what you are saying is you are not going to say where in his works he quotes the Gospel of Matthew.

I gave you the opportunity.

It's OK, I have known all along what the outcome of this debate would be.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: Seede
I would appreciate it if you read clearly what I say so I don't have to keep answering redundant questions and questions based on misquotes of my actual comments, please.

A wise man once said:

“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them. This, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean. (Matthew 7:12)

That doesn't just count for Seede's actual comments and I would assume you would like people not to twist or talk past a point you're making to bring up something that sounds a bit like it but is easier to challenge and was never made initially by you but instead would like people to respond to the actual points you're making.
edit on 26-12-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: Seede
I would appreciate it if you read clearly what I say so I don't have to keep answering redundant questions and questions based on misquotes of my actual comments, please.

A wise man once said:

“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them. This, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean. (Matthew 7:12)

That doesn't just count for Seede's actual comments and I would assume you would like people not to twist or talk past a point you're making to bring up something that sounds a bit like it but is easier to challenge and was never made initially by you but instead would like people to respond to the actual points you're making.


Many people have said many things.

I am saying you are too sore to admit you were wrong, unable to back up your claim and getting desperate.

And again changing the subject. I think I am through with you, you've served your purpose and are just piling on evidence that you know you are wrong and too proud to admit it.

Anyone who was not wrong would have long ago just quoted Justin quoting from Matthew, the problem is HE NEVER DID.

And THIS is your problem. Not me.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

But do have a fine day good sir.



posted on Dec, 27 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

See?

I knew exactly where I was taking you all along because I knew you were wrong. Because I did the appropriate research and never had a moment of doubt.

You might not be new, but you are not right.

And look how things ended!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join