A "junk DNA" discussion

[klaus54]

While it is possible Polycarp was born before the temple fell; he wasn't someone who knew John the Apostle.

And your evidence is ...?

K54

[Omniskeptical]

Polycarp lies about everything, claims to know Cerinthus who isn't in the bible, says Marcion is a firstborn of satan. John having ascended like Enoch would not be around to even rebuke Polycarp. Nothing the man says can be taken too seriously, because he didn't know what he was talking about, which is typical of the early church fathers.

[klaus54]

Polycarp lies about everything, claims to know Cerinthus who isn't in the bible, says Marcion is a firstborn of satan. John having ascended like Enoch would not be around to even rebuke Polycarp. Nothing the man says can be taken too seriously, because he didn't know what he was talking about, which is typical of the early church fathers.

So Polycarp didn't know John because the former lied about Cerinthus who isn't in the Bible???

Sounds like you are creating your own stratigraphic column of ipse dixits.

K54

[phank]

So Polycarp didn't know John because the former lied about Cerinthus who isn't in the Bible???

Sounds like you are creating your own stratigraphic column of ipse dixits.

K54

There is some evidence

http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/apostolic.html and links from that site

that there were at least TWO people named John, and that there was some confusion between them. These were "John the apostle" and "John the presbyter", different people. The claim that Polycarp was a disciple of "John" was made by Irenaeus, who claimed that both Polycarp and Papius were disciples of "John". But both Johns were preachers, and the apostle John was dead during the times of Polycarp and Papias, while John the Presbyter was alive and preaching. The linguistic evidence is that the (very young at the time) Irenaeus got these confused.

All of which strongly suggests that reconstructing this history and these relationships on the basis of what documents remain is largely guesswork. Arguments for every narrative (there are many) rest heavily on the argument from silence - that if X were true, SURELY this particular remaining letter would have mentioned it. There's no mention, so it wasn't true!

To draw a parallel (and illustrate the tons of salt ANY narrative must be taken with), consider someone in the far future disputing the existence of the Boston Red Sox. And all that survives is a letter from "Mike" to his sister wishing her a happy birthday. Now, this letter SAYS it was mailed from Birmingham, but that was probably a mistranslation of "Boston". And since the letter makes no mention of the Red Sox, they must not have existed! Nearly all of the historical analysis of this paucity of ancient documents follows this pattern.

[klaus54]

Interesting.

Which "John"?

Evidence that 1) Polycarp of Smyrna existed and 2) was not born til after the fall of Jerusalem???

You'll have to forgive me, but my "history" with Omniskeptical is that he/she pulls much of his/her blathering out of her/his ----.

K54

[Omniskeptical]

.. 2) was not born til after the fall of Jerusalem???

You'll have to forgive me, but my "history" with Omniskeptical is that he/she pulls much of his/her blathering out of her/his ----.

K54

Thus John was already gone then, and Polycarp couldn't have known him. John did not taste death, which means much of the early church was translated like Enoch.

[klaus54]

Thus John was already gone then, and Polycarp couldn't have known him. John did not taste death, which means much of the early church was translated like Enoch.

You didn't address my question.

Which "John"?

Evidence that 1) Polycarp of Smyrna existed and 2) was not born til after the fall of Jerusalem???

[Omniskeptical]

You didn't address my question.

There is only one John. :bye:

[klaus54]

There is only one John. :bye:

No there isn't.

And :thanks:

K54

[Omniskeptical]

No there isn't.

And :thanks:

K54

There is only one John in the New Testament. And no problem.

[klaus54]

Was there?

And who cares what a moron such as you thinks?

BTW, what is a Unitarian Non-Evolutionist anyhoo?

Looking forward to an intelligent ~~cough~~ repartee.

K54

[Roy]

There is only one John in the New Testament. And no problem.

What? That's insane.

Unless you think John had two mothers, survived being beheaded and served up as an entree, prosecuted himself in court, changed his name to Mark and wrote not one but two gospels.

Roy

[Omniskeptical]

I didn't say that. But there was only one apostle John, despite many roman catholic retards who say otherwise.