Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

And the POSTERIOR nature of Irenaeus's formulation is revealed when he acknowledges that the followers of Mark revere a Tetrad as a generative force in the universe LONG BEFORE the four gospels were established:

This Mark then, declaring that he alone was the matrix and receptacle of the Sige of Colorbasus, inasmuch as he was only-begotten, has brought to the birth in some such way as follows that which was committed to him of the defective Euthymesis. He declares that the infinitely exalted Tetrad descended upon him from the invisible and indescribable places in the form of a woman (for the world could not have borne it coming in its male form), and expounded to him alone its own nature, and the origin of all things, which it had never before revealed to any one either of gods or men.

Clement of Alexandria who betrays his association with this 'Mark' (= evangelist undoubtedly) makes reference to the same Pythagorean interest which in case you are capable of reading is spelled out in the Wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetractys

In other words, it wasn't 'popularity' in the Church which determined the correct number of gospels BUT A PRE-EXISTENT MYSTIC INTEREST IN THE NUMBER FOUR DEVELOPED FROM HERETICAL SOURCES. Indeed Irenaeus says as much when he says God through the Holy Spirit determined that there would be four groups associated with four corrupted gospels reconstituted in their correct form in the holy fourfold gospel revealed to the world at the time Irenaeus was writing no before.

Secret Alias wrote: WTF does any of this have to do with 'popularity'?
.

Here is a little lesson in comprehension. Its why you have penny books, not $200 dollar books.


Irenaeus is FKN telling you how popular these text were.

. So firm is the ground upon which these Gospels rest, that the very heretics themselves bear witness to them

He is not making them firm, they were already firm based on how FKN popular they were EVEN in heretics circles that perverted their meaning [like you] !!!!!!!!!

For the Ebionites, who use Matthew's Gospel

So Matthew was popular before Irenaeus was even involved


And maybe you didn't know the reason Matthew is the first gospel in the NT was because of its widespread popularity.

But Marcion, mutilating that according to Luke

Oh so Luke very popular as well that it was also used by those not following traditional views.

but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified. Those, moreover, who follow Valentinus, making copious use of that according to John, to illustrate their conjunctions

Wow! popular all over the board.

Irenaeus is FKN telling you how popular these text were.

Where does he say this? He only speaks of four heretics having the books in corrupt form and the 'fourfold' nature of this situation foreshadowing the canonizing of four gospels in his own age. He nowhere says that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all used in the churches because they were popular.

Secret Alias wrote:
Clement of Alexandria who betrays his association with this 'Mark' (= evangelist undoubtedly) makes reference to the same Pythagorean interest which in case you are capable of reading is spelled out in the Wikipedia article:

.

So you don't understand the rhetorical use of Pythagorean interest to justify the 4?

The closest he gets to saying this is that Matthew, Luke, Mark and John were evangelists who wrote gospels but nowhere does he speak of the texts being ubiquitous in the Church. In fact a careful reading of book three sees Irenaeus develop a more perplexing line of argumentation against the heresies.

The four heresies have the four gospels (each heresy one of the four gospels and only one). God ordained this to foreshadow the coming of the fourfold canon.

But in the place of widespread use of the four gospels Irenaeus appeals instead to the 'faith' - often the ignorant illiterate faith of the barbarians but a voiced faith uttered during the acknowledgement of the creed (presumably the Apostolic Creed of some sort). But it is incredible to actually see how the texts of written gospels IS NEVER SAID to be in the hands of believers. His focus instead is on 'faith' and creed.

So you don't understand the rhetorical use of Pythagorean interest to justify the 4?

So Irenaeus doesn't believe that God shaped the world by the number 4? He doesn't really believe that the Holy Spirit arranged the four gospels to have been corrupted by four heretical schools and rescued by Irenaeus as a sign of the correctness of four gospels? Irenaeus doesn't believe that God made the world with four winds and wasn't surrounded by four living creatures? He doesn't really believe that John in the Book of Revelation saw the four creatures and only connects them to the gospels as a 'rhetorical argument' to disguise the 'popularity' of these texts in the Church? Only a moron could come up with a moron line of reasoning like this.

Secret Alias wrote: He only speaks of four heretics having the books in corrupt form .

You idiot.

He explains in full and detail HIS CONTEXT is more in the number, less and more then 4 is where the corruption lies. That and Marcions redaction of Luke.

9. These things being so, all who destroy the form of the Gospel are vain, unlearned, and also audacious; those, [I mean,] who represent the aspects of the Gospel as being either more in number than as aforesaid, or, on the other hand, fewer.

Secret Alias wrote: So Irenaeus doesn't believe that God shaped the world by the number 4?.

Do you even have a clue what rhetorical prose is?

That comes later. The idea of four being divinely ordained (NOT POPULAR) is done through the pre-existence of 'four heresies' = arbat ha minim each with one gospel which foreshadowed the generative power of the number four generally - a view he stole from the followers of Mark.

Do you even have a clue what rhetorical prose is?

You're backing yourself into the stupid corner, stupidhead. Are you really going to dummy down on the idea that Irenaeus's use of the BIBLICAL SYMBOLISM of the number four was merely rhetorical. Careful you are about to lose the debate.