Why are some New Kingdom dates quotes in pairs two years apart?

Why are some New Kingdom dates quotes in pairs two years apart?

I am reading about New Kingdom Egypt. Many events are doubly-dated. For example, Akhenaten's reign is given as 1353-1336 BCE or 1351-1334 BCE. These dates always seem to be two years apart.

I understand the difficulties which arise with dating ancient events, and that astronomical events and other synchronisms are used, imperfectly, to date events.

What specific dating systems are being used to give dates for this era and why are they two years apart?


I suspect that the particular example you have quoted is from the Wikipedia article on Akhenaten.

The references provided for the two date ranges are given as

  • Encyclopædia Britannica 1353-1336 BC
  • Jürgen von Beckerath 1351-1334 BC

More generally, the scholarly consensus is the so-called Conventional Egyptian chronology. There are some problems with the conventional chronology, however. Most of these are relatively minor, but the source of a lot of scholarly debate.

There are also a number of alternative chronologies, intended to solve specific problems with the conventional chronology. However, to date, none of these have been widely accepted.

The Wikipedia article provides a good overview.


Outlander Quotes

&ldquoI will find you," he whispered in my ear. "I promise. If I must endure two hundred years of purgatory, two hundred years without you - then that is my punishment, which I have earned for my crimes. For I have lied, and killed, and stolen betrayed and broken trust. But there is the one thing that shall lie in the balance. When I shall stand before God, I shall have one thing to say, to weigh against the rest."

His voice dropped, nearly to a whisper, and his arms tightened around me.

Lord, ye gave me a rare woman, and God! I loved her well.&rdquo
― Diana Gabaldon, Dragonfly in Amber

&ldquoWhat's that you're doing, Sassenach?"

"Making out little Gizmo's birth certificate--so far as I can," I added.

"Gizmo?" he said doubtfully. "That will be a saint's name?"

"I shouldn't think so, though you never know, what with people named Pantaleon and Onuphrius. Or Ferreolus."

"Ferreolus? I dinna think I ken that one." He leaned back, hands linked over his knee.

"One of my favorites," I told him, carefully filling in the birthdate and time of birth--even that was an estimate, poor thing. There were precisely two bits of unequivocal information on this birth certificate--the date and the name of the doctor who's delivered him.

"Ferreolus," I went on with some new enjoyment, "is the patron saint of sick poultry. Christian martyr. He was a Roman tribune and a secret Christian. Having been found out, he was chained up in the prison cesspool to await trial--I suppose the cells must have been full. Sounds rather daredevil he slipped his chains and escaped through the sewer. They caught up with him, though, dragged him back and beheaded him."

"What has that got to do wi' chickens?"

"I haven't the faintest idea. Take it up with the Vatican," I advised him.

"Mmphm. Aye, well, I've always been fond of Saint Guignole, myself." I could see the glint in his eye, but couldn't resist.

"And what's he the patron of?"

"He's involved against impotence." The glint got stronger. "I saw a statue of him in Brest once they did say it had been there for a thousand years. 'Twas a miraculous statue--it had a cock like a gun muzzle, and--"

"Well, the size wasna the miraculous bit," he said, waving me to silence. "Or not quite. The townsfolk say that for a thousand years, folk have whittled away bits of it as holy relics, and yet the cock is still as big as ever." He grinned at me. "They do say that a man w' a bit of St. Guignole in his pocket can last a night and a day without tiring."

"Not with the same woman, I don't imagine," I said dryly. "It does rather make you wonder what he did to merit sainthood, though, doesn't it?"

"Any man who's had his prayer answered could tell yet that, Sassenach."
(PP. 841-842)&rdquo
― Diana Gabaldon, Drums of Autumn

&ldquoSome enterprising rabbit had dug its way under the stakes of my garden again. One voracious rabbit could eat a cabbage down to the roots, and from the looks of things, he'd brought friends. I sighed and squatted to repair the damage, packing rocks and earth back into the hole. The loss of Ian was a constant ache at such moments as this, I missed his horrible dog as well.

I had brought a large collection of cuttings and seeds from River Run, most of which had survived the journey. It was mid-June, still time--barely--to put in a fresh crop of carrots. The small patch of potato vines was all right, so were the peanut bushes rabbits wouldn't touch those, and didn't care for the aromatic herbs either, except the fennel, which they gobbled like licorice.

I wanted cabbages, though, to preserve a sauerkraut come winter, we would want food with some taste to it, as well as some vitamin C. I had enough seed left, and could raise a couple of decent crops before the weather turned cold, if I could keep the bloody rabbits off. I drummed my fingers on the handle of my basket, thinking. The Indians scattered clippings of their hair around the edges of the fields, but that was more protection against deer than rabbits.

Jamie was the best repellent, I decided. Nayawenne had told me that the scent of carnivore urine would keep rabbits away--and a man who ate meat was nearly as good as a mountain lion, to say nothing of being more biddable. Yes, that would do he'd shot a deer only two days ago it was still hanging. I should brew a fresh bucket of spruce beer to go with the roast venison, though . . . (Page 844)&rdquo
― Diana Gabaldon, Drums of Autumn


Racism Under Russell

Charles Taze Russell was the founder of the Watch Tower Society, and the chief editor and publisher of Zion’s Watch Tower, as the Watchtower was known in those days. 1 The distribution of the Watchtower magazine, as well as Russell’s other books, was almost entirely dependent on the work of “volunteers,” later known as colporteurs (the forerunners of today’s “pioneers”), whose job it was to offer subscriptions to readers.

It seems that Russell was quite picky when it came to who could serve in this privileged capacity on behalf of the Society. In the March 1 st issue of the Watchtower, his criteria deliberately restricted those who might serve as volunteers to members of “white Protestant churches.” Understandably, the black brothers at that time were none too pleased by the obvious discrimination, and wrote to the Society’s headquarters to complain. This was the printed response:

The above excerpt is taken from Zion’s Watch Tower, April 15th 1900, page 122

[Click on any of the graphics to see a full-screen version for easier reading.]

Russell’s magazine freely acknowledged that its discriminatory advertisement for volunteers was founded on a stereotype of blacks as having “less education than whites.” Then it expressed the outrageous opinion that “reading matter distributed to a colored congregation would more than half of it be utterly wasted.”

It seems difficult to fathom how Russell, who blushed at suggestions that he was God’s “Faithful and Wise Servant,” could harbor and promulgate such a deplorable and misconceived attitude towards black men and women. This bizarre outlook revealed itself in Russell’s other writings, most notably when he touched on his strange obsession with “the Ethiopian’s skin.”

The above excerpt is taken from Zion’s Watch Tower, October 1st 1900, pages 296-297

Russell believed that the skin of a black brother would turn white during the Millennial Kingdom

In the above article entitled “Can Restitution Change The Ethiopian’s Skin?” Russell leaps upon an incident of a black preacher claiming to have developed white skin after having prayed for it.

Reverend Draper, who apparently told others that “if he could only be white like his employer, he would be happy,” started praying thirty years prior to the article and experienced a transformation over the period leading up to its publication. Once his skin was completely white, he returned to his former church, and had a hard time convincing the members of his identity. We now know that this “miraculous” transformation was the result of Vitiligo, a medical condition resulting in depigmentation of areas of skin. It isn’t that rare, and I’ve met people who have this condition myself. Perhaps you have too.

However, Russell was so fixated with the idea of black people becoming white that he would apparently leap on any related report as evidence that this might happen on a grander scale in the future. The February 15, 1904 Watchtower reported a similar incident involving a nine-year-old boy named Julius Jackson under the heading “Can The Ethiopian Change His Skin?” which I reproduce below:

The above excerpt is taken from Zion’s Watch Tower, February 15th 1904, pages 52-53

Again, it is difficult to fathom why Russell was so preoccupied with the concept of blacks becoming whites. What was so wrong, in his view, about their original color? Why would the color of a person’s skin make any difference to a God who is “not partial?” I suppose only Russell knew.

A telling insight into Russell’s attitudes towards race came in another Watchtower article in 1902. That article, entitled “The Negro Not A Beast,” attempted to banish the extremely offensive idea being promulgated in a book of the period that black men and women were somehow on a par with animals. Despite its tacit opposition to this outrageous concept, the Watchtower’s riposte was tainted by more than a hint of racist bigotry.

The above excerpt is taken from Zion’s Watch Tower, July 15th 1902, pages 215-216

To paint Africa’s “various tribes or nations of negroes” as being “degraded” is a highly offensive racial slur by any reasonable standard. By comparison, the article claims that the white race “exhibits some qualities of superiority over any other,” and enjoys “preeminence in the world.”

Further down, the same article states that the Caucasian has “greater intelligence and aptitude” as a result of a “commingling of blood” under “divine control.” In setting out to counter racist arguments, the article ends up making more than a few of its own. We are left with views that would not look out of place in a Nazi propaganda leaflet. And black people aren’t the only ones humiliated by this article it also suggests that Indians and Chinese have some catching up to do genetically before they are to “equally brighten their intellects.”

At this point, it is worth reminding ourselves that Charles Taze Russell didn’t necessarily pen these articles himself. Zion’s Watch Tower had at least five regular contributors. However, Russell was the chief editor and would have checked each article personally before approving it for print. Even if he hadn’t written a certain article himself, he would have signed off on it before publication in a magazine for which he was legally accountable. Therefore, readers may consider any racially offensive article published under his editorship as representing his views. I’m sure he would have scrapped any article without the slightest hesitation if it conflicted with his own opinions.

It wasn’t long before Russell’s dim view of the “colored brethren” generated yet more offense and outrage among his black readership. In January 1914, during a screening of the Photodrama of Creation at The Temple, West 63rd Street, a number of negro audience members were segregated from their white counterparts and made to sit separately on the balcony of the auditorium. This caused understandable outrage, and several wrote angry letters – furious that they had suffered such discrimination at the hands of their “brothers.” The Watchtower printed a response under the heading “The Color Line Found Necessary” in the April 1 magazine, reproduced below: 2

The above excerpt is taken from Zion’s Watch Tower, April 1st 1914, pages 105-106

I can barely imagine the humiliation of turning up at a screening of the Photodrama as a “fan” of Russell at the time, only to be separated and herded like an animal into a different part of the theater on account of my skin color. It would only add insult to my injury for me to be told that this was necessary so as to not upset white visitors, because, “explain it how you will, a majority of whites prefer not to intermingle with other races.”

I can’t imagine wishing to continue my association with the Bible Students after suffering such an indignity. After all, how could this be Christ’s church if “the success… of the enterprise of the Drama as respects the whites” was more important to Watchtower than observing racial equality? How could these truly be God’s people if they were so ready to pander to racist bigotry? Might it be because the leaders were racists themselves? These would have been my honest thoughts.

Any blacks who turned up to see the Photodrama screening in January 1914 at The Temple, West 63rd Street, were segregated

In any case, apparently not all so-called “colored brethren” were repelled by this incident. Evidently, the Society’s audience-numbers-over-equality line of reasoning was “entirely satisfactory to all of the fully consecrated” with only a few “tenacious and quarrelsome” individuals objecting.

It seems that, as respects this incident, everything boiled down to humility. After all, according to the article, “nature favors the colored brethren and sisters in the exercise of humility.” Although I believe the writer intended the remarks about humility as a pacifying compliment, they are also a clear nod towards the scourge of negro slavery that tarnished America before the Civil War. The writer attempts to commend the black readership for its perceived humble roots, irrespective of the despicable circumstances under which these were forged.

The article then goes on to revert back to Russell’s obsession with the skin of an Ethiopian, or more pointedly, his belief that black Christians could expect their skin to change when the “Millennial kingdom will be inaugurated.” The writer tells us that, when that time comes, all mankind will experience “restitution to the perfection of mind and body, feature and color, to the grand original standard, which God declared ‘very good.’ ” Again, quite why a Christian would need to have the color of his skin changed to the “original standard” is a mystery, and Russell’s strange preoccupation with this rather offensive concept found yet another outlet in this article.


You Know You Are Old When.

You know you are 50 when you knew when the Dead Sea was only sick.

You know you are old when you go to the beach and turn a wonderful color: Blue. It&rsquos from holding your stomach in.

You know you are old when people tell you how good you look.

You know you are old when almost everything hurts, and what doesn&rsquot hurt doesn&rsquot work.

You know you are old when the candles cost more than the cake.

You know you are old when you tell people you are retro.


New Year Wishes 2022:

When important occasions like 2022 New Year and Christmas are around, wishing our loved ones such as family and friends and our other social contacts, including people at work, is the essential thing to do. Wishing other people during these events strengthens our bond with them, raise our respect in their eyes, and help form long-lasting relationships with people.

However, even though our emotions are pure, the words don’t seem to support what we want to write. You will be glad to hear that you don’t need to worry about that anymore since we are here to help you with that. It is time that we brought you Happy New Year 2022 wishes to send to your family, friends, girlfriend, wife, work colleagues, and other social contacts.

Let us move ahead and start by bringing the Happy New Year 2022 Wishes for the family:

1. Happy New Year Wishes for Family:

The family is the most important thing we can have on this planet, and wishing them on events like New Year and Christmas should always be our first instinct. However, if you find yourself running short of the words to do so, here are a few New Year 2022 wishes that you can read from our site and send to your loved ones that you keep so close to your heart.

  • 2022 New Year’s Eve with you means magic. I always have so much fun when I party with my family. Thank you for being the most special people in the world. Have the best year!
  • My life would be so miserable without you in it! I feel extremely blessed to spend it with the most amazing people, and I will remember this beautiful new year’s night forever. I love you! New Year, 2022!
  • You are so much more than a family to me. You make me laugh when I’m about to cry you make me happy when I feel like the whole world is against me. Thank you for everything. So much more to come. New Year 2022!
  • Winter holidays are my favorite time of the year because it’s usually cold enough to find myself in the warm arms of my loving family. New Year 2022!
  • Sometimes I regret that I can’t afford to spend enough time with my precious family, but I believe that on New Year’s night, I can fix it all. Can’t wait to see you tonight! Happy New Year 2022!

These were some heartful New Year wishes for the family that you can send to each family member and wish them a New Year 2022.

2. New Year Wishes for Friends:

Besides the fact that we are not tied with blood to them, friends are no different from the idea of what a family is. In other words, we can say that friends are just another family, however, with different parents and they are ones who make occasions like New Year even more beautiful. That’s why if there is one thing you don’t want to miss, it wishes your friends on New Year’s Eve.

Again, while these relations are too important, running scarce words is a common thing to occur with you. We are here to save you again from that confusion and bring you some beautifully written lines that you can simply take from our website, edit words that best express your feeling, and send them over to the members of your second family.

    • I wish the upcoming year for you to be a wonderful one filled with joy and pleasure.
    • Wishing that you would have many blessings in the upcoming New Year. Enjoy the holidays.
    • I would like to thank you for everything that you did for me in the last year. I wish you a happy new year, 2022!
    • I have seen you improving throughout the past year. Keep it up in the next year as well. Happy New Year 2022!
    • I am counting my blessings and wishing you even more! Have the wonderful new year 2022 my friend!

    You can copy the text over to your phone and send these wishes right now to your friends because forgetting about this important business is something you don’t want to do.

    3. New Year Wishes for Love:

    Whether you are engaged or have a girlfriend or boyfriend, forgetting about sending New Year wishes can prove suicidal. Jokes apart, of course, this is something you look forward to doing, and if you are feeling confused about what words to choose to wish a 2022 New Year to the love of your life, here are a few lovely new years wishes that you can send him/her:

    • All I want is to spend every New Year’s Eve with you. Even though we have our ups and downs, I’m sure you are my soulmate. Cheers to us, baby. May the upcoming year be the luckiest one.
    • Midnight kisses from you are the best. I wouldn’t trade you for the world, and I wish you always to feel my love, no matter what. Let’s make this year unforgettable, honey. Happy New Year 2022!
    • It’s been an absolute pleasure to spend this year with you. Wishing you a pleased new year with my whole heart.
    • Thank you for holding my hand tighter during the most vulnerable days of my life and making sure that I am doing okay. I missed you in my life, HNY 2022.
    • You are a gem that I found for being too lucky. I look for nothing else in my life except for being with you forever! HNY 2022!

    This new year wishes for girlfriend and boyfriend can help you win their hearts 100 times over, making your relationship grow even more.

    4. New Year Wishes for Teachers:

    Teachers are equally important as our parents are since they are the ones who spend most of their time the whole year teaching us new stuff and make us better persons in life. Being someone who has immense respect for his teachers, sending them heartfelt wishes full of love and respect is something you should be right and for that, here are a few lines that would give you a good idea about what to say:

    • All the peace, love, and happiness for the new year to my favorite teacher! I hope your days and filled with everything you desire!
    • May the new year bring happiness, peace, and prosperity to my favorite teacher. Happy New Year 2022!
    • May the new year see you in good health with plenty of love and happiness. New Year 2022 to my favorite teacher!
    • Happy New Year 2022 to the world’s best teacher. May each day be full of happiness and peace, and may your new year’s dreams come true!
    • Much love and respect to my favorite teacher this coming year. May you enjoy many laughs and total peace! 2022 New Year!

    We hope you enjoyed reading these lines, and if you like any of them, copy them over to your smartphone right now and send them via email or SMS to your teachers and earn their respect.

    5. New Year Wishes for Wife and Husband:

    The wife and husband pair make the most beautiful relations that exist on this planet, and if they keep showing love and respect gestures to each other, it forms an unbreakable family that the world admires. Growing that admiration between them is sending wishes and giving gifts on important occasions like New Year and Christmas will help you grow that relationship even stronger.

    If you are thinking about them and can’t seem to come up with heartful lines, here is a New Year Gift from our side in the form of lovely New Year wishes for husband and wife:

    • Happiness is spending the last night of the year with you. Your presence is the biggest blessing of all. Happy new year to my amazing husband!
    • Thanks for being such a responsible husband and a caring lover. You are always the one for me and always will be. Happy new year 2022!
    • You fill my heart with boundless excitement every time you look into my eyes. As long as we are together, there can never be a bad year ahead of us. New year 2022!
    • I want to be the shield that protects you from worries. I want to become the shelter that saves you from the storms. I want to become everything that you need this new year!
    • Let the upcoming year bring exciting surprises and more enjoyable moments than the previous year. Oh, honey, I love you so much. Happy New Year 2022.

    • The 3,541lb female shark named Nukumi usually swims down the US east coast
    • The large 17ft shark is being tracked by OCEARCH using satellite technology
    • The 50 year old matriarch is the largest ever tagged in the north America region
    • Experts can't say for certain it will hit UK shores but it is capable of doing so

    Published: 15:32 BST, 23 April 2021 | Updated: 16:26 BST, 23 April 2021

    A 17ft long great white shark has crossed the Atlantic, becoming only the second in known history to do so, potentially hitting British shores this summer.

    The 3,541lb female shark named Nukumi usually swims up and down the east coast of America and Canada but the tagged creature took an unexpected turn.

    The 50-year-old matriarch - the largest ever tagged in the region by scientists who are monitoring her - took a swerve east, across the Atlantic.

    Migratory species like great white sharks rarely cross the Mid-Atlantic Ridge - a barrier in the middle of the ocean - but Nukumi took the plunge earlier this month.

    And she has kept going, surfacing long enough for the tag in her dorsal fin to 'ping' a GPS location back to gripped shark trackers at science organisation OCEARCH.

    A 17ft long great white shark has crossed the Atlantic, becoming only the second in known history to do so, potentially hitting British shores this summer

    British coast is facing an invasion of SHARKS as a result of reduced marine traffic in lockdown

    A drop in maritime traffic may be behind a surge in the number of sharks seen in British waters, according to an expert.

    There have been multiple sightings of both basking and porbeagle sharks in recent weeks with members of the public spotting them closer to the shore than usual.

    Some have ended up in marinas while others have been photographed and filmed in the sea just off the coast.

    David Sims, Professor of Marine Ecology, Ocean and Earth Science at the University of Southampton, believes the spike could be due to a drop in maritime voyages.

    The only other great white shark tracked making the crossing was Lydia, in April 2014, which stunned scientists with an epic journey to the coast of Portugal.

    Nukumi's two-month voyage has so far taken her to 1,700 nautical miles off British shores - and experts admitted: 'She is capable of reaching the UK coast'.

    Experts reckon she's on the move because she could be pregnant, and is looking for a place to give birth away from her aggressive male counterparts.

    OCEARCH's chief scientist Dr Bob Hueter said Nukumi has crossed from the western Atlantic to the eastern Atlantic over the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the dividing feature between west and east.

    'She has been swimming eastward for about two months since she left the U.S.. coast off the state of North Carolina,' he explained.

    'As of her last known location, Nukumi was still about 1,700 nautical miles from the UK,' which is less than her distance from the US coast that she's already travelled.

    'She is capable of reaching the UK coast but we would not predict that she will do that, as white sharks are rare off the UK.

    'If she does not turn back soon, she might go to offshore islands or seamounts in the eastern Atlantic, places like the Azores.

    'Or perhaps she will head towards the opening into the Mediterranean Sea, as there are white sharks in the Med.'


    Play buttons

    DanTDM has received many play buttons, as Dan has extreme popularity and fame.

    • On 25 June 2013, Dan got his silver play button after hitting 100,000 subscribers
    • On 10 December 2013, Dan got his golden play button after hitting 1,000,000 subscribers
    • On July 30, 2016, Dan got his diamond play button after hitting 10,000,000 subscribers. He currently has over 25,000,000 subscribers.

    Dan was notable in the past because of his hair which most people defined it as "crazy". Dan continuously liked to dye his hair in a number of colors, some of these colors include blonde, turquoise, light blue, and pink. Dan has mentioned that "When I was younger, I dyed my hair like every color of the rainbow."

    Brown

    The brown hair is his natural hair color/colour which he was born with. You can see Dan with this hair in his older videos, from the start of his channel to early December 2015. The video below is a video of Dan with brown hair, a few days before he dyed his hair blonde. When he has a beard, it is also brown. His beard is typically either clean shaven or chinstrap but he recently grew a mustache as well.

    Brown to blonde

    The first hair color change was when Dan dyed his hair blonde on December 9, 2015. He said that he dyed his hair blonde so that he could get the desired blue hair he wanted. After dying his hair blonde, he said that he liked the hair color but the hair color only lasted a day as he had to put blue dye over it.

    Blonde to turquoise

    The next hair color took place a day after he dyed his hair to blonde on December 10th, 2015. Dan meant to dye his hair blue but it turned turquoise instead.

    Turquoise to light blue

    Dan dyed his hair light blue on December 18, 2015. This time, to ensure blue and not turquoise, Dan mixed purple and blue dye together. In January 2016, Dan cut his emo sides and back real short but kept the top.

    DYEING MY HAIR PURPLE AND BLUE!!

    Light blue to dark blue

    This hair color/colour change was the first and only time that Dan went to a salon to get his hair dyed instead of doing it himself. This hair color/colour change took place on March 2, 2016. During this time, Dan also changed his hairstyle to more of a brushed overlook. There is no footage online of his hair being dyed but below is his first video with dark blue hair.

    Dark blue to navy blue

    This hair change took place on March 16, 2017, but Dan uploaded the video on the hair 3 days later on March 19, 2017. In the video he talks about how horrible and messed up his hair is, so he says that he is gonna get his hair fixed in 45 minutes. So in within those 45 minutes, Dan uses Photoshop to see what kind of hair he could put and see if he can pull it off. After his hair appointment, he came back with hair which looks is dyed navy blue and he now goes for a new hairstyle where he swooshes his hair up more.

    Navy blue to purple

    Dan posted a goal on Twitter saying that if he hit the goal of 3,000 likes he would mix pink dye with blue dye and dye his hair whatever color he made. To his surprise, he hit the like goal and 15 minutes later his hair was purple! This change took place on July 29, 2017.

    DYEING MY HAIR PINK & BLUE!!

    Purple to blonde

    On August 26, 2017, Dan uploaded a video stating that he wanted to re-dye his hair pink and blue as last time he didn't achieve what he was going for. This time he dyed his hair blonde by a professional and then tried to dye his hair pink and blue on his own.

    WHAT HAVE I DONE THIS TIME.

    Blonde to pink and blue

    Again on August 26, 2017, he uploaded a video where he dyed his hair blonde by a professional. After his hair was dyed blonde, he dyed his hair pink and blue again just as he did on July 29, 2017. But this time he dyed his hair blonde before putting the pink and blue on, so he achieved the look he was going for.

    Pink and blue to cerulean

    Dan changed his hair from pink and blue to cerulean on September 14, 2017, he didn't show him dying it. However, he mentions it in the video when he changed his hair color.

    NEIGHBOR'S SECRET HAUNTED STORE.

    Cerulean to blue

    At some point, Dan decided to dye his hair blue again.

    Blue to blonde

    On February 5, 2018, Dan dyed his hair blonde again. The thumbnail is Justin Bieber and Dan comparing their blonde Hair.

    IS THAT DANTDM OR JUSTIN BIEBER?!

    Blonde to blue

    On February 6, 2018, Dan dyed his hair blue again.

    I HATE THIS LITTLE GUY SO MUCH. (Trap Adventure 2 2)

    Blue to blue and violet galaxy

    On March 14, 2018, Dan dyed his hair purple.

    OUR ROCKET GOES HERE. (Subnautica 10)

    Blue to brown

    On May 31, 2019, Dan changed his hair to brown because, his hair was badly damaged, and his hair had become thinner. Dan has also said that he will not dye his hair again.


    The Historical Case for Paul’s Apostleship

    Introduction
    Section 1. Positive Historical Case for Paul’s Apostleship
    Section 2. Critiquing the Muslim Misuse of the Ebionites
    Section 3. Early Muslim Sources Affirming the Apostleship of Paul
    Conclusion

    Introduction

    Many Muslim critics assert that the Apostle Paul was not a true Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. They erroneously argue that Paul came in after the real Apostles and took over the scene corrupting Christianity with new foreign teachings. Many Muslims assert that the original message of Jesus and his true followers, their supposed Islamic teaching, was in complete disagreement with Paul’s “new” theology. In contrast to this modern Islamic view the Christian position is that history demonstrates Paul was truly converted to Christianity. Christians argue that the evidence shows he was accepted by the original Apostles and by the earliest Christians as a genuine convert with sound theology who was given an important mission from Christ himself.

    In this article I will weigh the evidence that both sides offer. When investigating historical issues it is important to use a reliable method to come to truth. I will be appealing to what is known as the historical method in this article as I argue that there are many strong reasons to affirm Paul’s apostleship and no strong reasons to deny Paul’s apostleship. I will utilize historical principles including the concept of multiple independent attestation, early accounts (i.e., the oldest source material), eyewitness testimony, disinterest statements, and the criterion of embarrassment. It is also important to speak to the lack of early reliable evidence for the modern Muslim view concerning Paul. Lastly I will demonstrate that the modern Islamic polemic against Paul is not consistent with many early Muslim traditions which affirm that Paul was in fact viewed as a true Apostle. I believe that Muslims are forced to reject Paul and blame him in trying to explain why their Quran affirms Christian Scriptures(1) and yet teaches that Christianity has false teachings. To the Muslim Paul corrupting Christianity serves as reconciliation to this problem. However, we will see that their rejection of Paul and their accusations are completely erroneous.

    Section 1. Positive Historical Case for Paul’s Apostleship

    When historians use the historical method they will consult the earliest sources regarding the historical issue in question. The earliest sources pertaining to Paul are the 1 st century documents that were canonized into the Bible in the 4 th century. The Bible is not one source - it is a compiled collection of many separate documents written over a span of about 1400 years. The 1 st century texts that were canonized into the New Testament have much to say concerning the Apostle Paul and are thus very important to our study. Some Muslims may object and assert that one can not use the Bible to prove Paul. However, such a surface level objection is based on ignorance since, again, the New Testament is a collection of valuable early historical documents, many of which speak directly to this issue. To discard the 1 st century documents that are in the Bible and not include them in our study would be to neglect the earliest sources we have concerning this issue. That method would essentially be to irresponsibly throw away important data, which no serious historian or researcher would ever do. If historical sources don’t count then we can’t know anything about history.

    1 st Century Biblical Sources

    With respect to the 1 st century Biblical evidence concerning Paul we have Paul’s writings (Romans 1 & 2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1 & 2 Thessalonians 1 & 2 Timothy Titus and Philemon), the history of the 1 st century church known as “Acts” or “Acts of the Apostles,” and a Christian epistle known as 2 Peter. So, with respect to 1 st century Biblical writings we have Paul’s epistles as well as two other independent documents to work with. All of the 1 st century Biblical sources that mention Paul affirm that Paul was a genuine Apostle. None of them question that.

    All through out the book of Acts we see Paul identified as a true Apostle. And so we could quote numerous passages affirming this from Acts. However, one striking feature is that in the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council Paul played a leading role with the other Apostles such as James and Peter in answering the question about Gentiles being under the law. As the council was in session we see the following:

    “And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.” (Acts 15:12)

    Paul and Barnabas spoke after Peter (vv. 7-11) and right before James (vv. 13-21) who concluded the council and gave the final decision that Gentiles are not under the law. This demonstrates that there was 1 st century recognition of Paul’s acceptance by the early church and by the Apostles themselves as an authoritative voice.

    The book 2 Peter is rejected by many liberal scholars and Muslims but there is a strong case for its authority and for Petrine authorship.(2) This text is another 1 st century source that not only affirms that Paul was a true Apostle, but it also identifies Paul’s writings as Scripture:

    " 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures." (2 Peter 3:15-16)

    The best case scenario is that Peter wrote this and is accepting Paul. I believe this is the case. The worst case scenario is that this is another independent 1 st century attestation affirming the reliability of Paul which we can add to the list. Even if it were not from Peter, it is still an early attestation which was accepted by the church and even added to the Canon of Scripture. Historians look for the earliest 1 st century writings when it comes to Jesus and early Christianity. That there are no early 1 st century writings asserting that Paul was a false Apostle discredits the Muslim position severely. The historical principles of early sources and multiple independent attestation is thus met with respect to 1 st century Biblical evidence for Paul.

    If Paul was a true Apostle we would expect his own letters to confirm that this was so. It must be asked: is there anything in Paul’s writings that historians would accept as proving that he was genuine? There are many things to consider. For example it is important to consider the principle of embarrassment which is the principle that something or someone is more likely to be authentic if there are embarrassing themes that you wouldn’t expect to be openly talked about. We see that Paul was quite open about his shortcomings, disputes with other Apostles, and his flaws. Such things persuade historians of Paul’s integrity and honesty, and thus his claims to apostleship gain credibility.

    Paul was open about his humanity and imperfection

    " 8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith-- 10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. 12 Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own." (Philippians 3:8-12)

    " 12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry 13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. 14 And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners of whom I am chief. 16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting." (1 Timothy 1:12-16)

    " 7 So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited. 8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. 9 But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me." (2 Corinthians 12:7-9)

    This information meets the principle of embarrassment which historians look for. Christ and the Apostles had a very high view of holiness or sanctification(3) and so therefore we wouldn’t expect Paul to admit his imperfection and need for grace if he was an imposter trying to usurp or lead people away from the moral teachers Jesus and the Apostles. It is a human tendency to want to appear morally good in religious settings. This is especially true of those times. Although Paul was a sanctified model for morality and exhorted others to be moral, he was honest in admitting that he, like everyone else except Christ, was not perfect and that he, like everyone else, relied on God’s grace in his life. We know from history that later untrustworthy people who claimed to follow Christ, such as Pelagius, dishonestly claimed to be completely morally perfect(4). One would naturally expect something like this from Paul if he was trying to usurp Jesus and the Apostles who taught holiness and sanctification. But Paul, being genuine, admitted his imperfection, as did the other Prophets and Apostles either explicitly or implicitly(5), and taught that one ought to strive for holiness in light of being imperfect. In being honest about his imperfection and his reliance on God’s grace Paul was in fact doing the right thing according to Jesus’ teachings on salvation.(6) Hence, this kind of material demonstrates that Paul was genuine since if he was not then there would be no reason to include these types of admissions in his epistles – admissions that critics may twist or use against Paul.

    Paul recorded his rebuke of Peter

    One thing you would not want to do if all you were was a false Apostle pretending to be a true Apostle is invent a story where you rebuke a major influential Apostle in front of others for not handling the Gospel accurately. However, this actually happened. Paul did just that to the Apostle Peter demonstrating that Paul genuinely cared about the Gospel and would not compromise it for anyone, including major Apostles he worked with who stepped out of line:

    “ 11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?" 15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.” (Galatians 2:11-16)

    Although Peter learned from this mistake and would go on to grow in grace, remain close with Paul, and eventually die as a martyr in Rome where Paul was also martyred, proving that Peter was a genuine appointed leader of the early church(7), this information tells us a lot about the integrity and reliability of Paul. One would not expect Paul to report that he publically rebuked a fellow worker and major Apostle if in fact he was some usurper trying fit in. You would expect him to want to avoid any unnecessary controversies or quarrels. This meets the principle of embarrassment.

    Disinterested Comment about James

    We can know Paul was a reliable true Apostle because of his disinterested comment about the Apostle James in Galatians 1:19:

    “ 18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days. 19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother.” (Galatians 1:18-19)

    Notice the disinterested off the cuff remark from Paul about James. The point is if Paul was a false Apostle inventing stories we would not expect him to just mention James in passing without making a point. The fact that Paul merely mentions James in this off the cuff way persuades historians that Paul is trustworthy showing that he wasn’t out to merely prove he was an Apostle with fanciful detailed stories, but that he was actually recalling real events about his association with the early church and Apostles.

    Paul’s Gospel in the 1 Corinthians 15 Apostles Creed is the original Gospel

    We can know Paul was a genuine Apostle preaching the original Gospel because his 1 Corinthians 15 Creed, which he received very early from the Apostles (Peter and James), is dated very closely to the time of Jesus’ crucifixion by scholarship which shows that Paul’s message was not some later innovation. The creed states:

    “ 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” (1 Corinthians 15:3-8)

    Here Paul reminds the Corinthian church that this Gospel message or creed which he previously preached to them orally was first given to him. It is important to note that Paul mentions that he received this creed before giving it to them. The 1 st century evidence demonstrates that Paul received this creed from Peter and James around A.D. 35 in Jerusalem. This demonstrates that Paul’s Gospel (Jesus’ sacrifice for sins, the resurrection and appearances) was not some later corruption but that it goes right back to the beginning – coming from the original Apostles who walked with Jesus. I will demonstrate this by constructing a timeline based on the early data.

    First, scholars put Jesus’ crucifixion at about A.D. 30. After surveying the historical literature Dr. Ben Witherington III affirms:

    “… it makes sense to conclude that Jesus died on Nisan 14 (April 7) in A.D. 30.”(8)

    In his work on the resurrection Dr. Mike Licona notes that A.D. 30 is the standard dating of Jesus’ death among scholars.(9) With that said Paul’s conversion to Christianity is dated 1-2 years after Jesus’ death by scholars. Dr. Craig L. Blomberg puts Paul’s conversion at A.D. 32 – two years after Jesus’ death.(10) One of the leading scholars on the subject is Dr. Gary Habermas and he notes that scholars usually place Paul’s conversion 1-2 years after the cross and goes with A.D. 32. He states:

    “… Paul’s conversion is usually placed at one or two years later, so let’s just say two – that’s 32.”(11)

    The 1st century documentation shows that after Paul’s conversion around A.D. 32, where he saw Jesus in a vision on the road to Damascus, he then went to Arabia and after three years he went to Jerusalem to see Peter and James:

    “ 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. 18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother.” (Galatians 1:15-19)

    With respect to this material Dr. Howard Clark Kee notes that it “can be critically examined. just as one would evaluate evidence in a modern court or academic setting.”(12) Therefore, when one does so you see that the information harmonizes into a consistent stream in that you are left with a clear picture about where this creed comes from. Galatians 1:15-19 shows that in A.D. 32 Paul was in Arabia for three years until A.D. 35 and then he went to Jerusalem. Paul went to Jerusalem in A.D. 35 to meet with Peter and James – five years after Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. In Galatians 1:18 it says something extremely noteworthy with respect to Paul’s fifteen day Jerusalem stay in A.D. 35. Its says “I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas [Peter] and remained with him for fifteen days.” The word for “visit” there is actually a bad translation. The Greek word there is histore? where we get our English word “history.” According to the standard Lexical work of today, the Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker Greek-English Lexicon, [2000], p. 483 the Greek word histore? means to to get information from.” It means to gain an account. Therefore, this 1 st century data shows that in A.D. 35 Paul met with Peter in Jerusalem to inquire about the Gospel or gain a historical account of the Gospel and confirm that what he had previously received from the Lord through Revelation (Gal. 1:11-12) was the true account of the Gospel preached by the original Apostles. That at this time Paul received the 1 Corinthians 15 creed from Peter and James is the position of the majority of scholars – the creed which talks about Jesus dying for our sins and rising from the dead. In the verses just preceding the actual creed in 1 Corinthians 15 (15:1-3) we see technical rabbinic terms denoting the passing of previously received oral tradition which many scholars argue is in reference to Peter transmitting this creed to Paul in A.D. 35 – words like “delivered” or “handed on” (paradido?mi) and “received (paralambano?) – the latter term being in reference to Paul receiving this creed from Peter and James in Jerusalem.

    It makes perfectly logical sense, along with the fact that Paul says he went to gain a historical account from Peter, that in his fifteen days in Jerusalem with Peter and James he received (paralambano?) this early creed. It is illogical to think that Paul would not be discussing such important issues with Peter and James after his dramatic experiences. Of course Paul would want to confirm the Gospel with Peter and James, gaining a historical account of the Gospel from them, to see if it lined up with what he had come to believe in the three years prior. This I feel, along with the majority of scholars who have written on the subject, is the best explanation, among a few, as to where Paul got his transmitted 1 Corinthians 15 creed.(13)

    If Paul received this creed from Peter in A.D. 35 then Paul’s Gospel is traced back right to the beginning. This would mean Paul’s message is not some later innovation or novelty but is instead traced back to those who walked and talked with Jesus, the Apostles. This utterly refutes the modern Muslim claim that Paul came in later and corrupted Christianity with a new Gospel. Moreover, there is no 1st century evidence questioning this event with Peter and James or casting doubt on it. Scholars have much to say concerning this creed, its reliability, and its date in light of Paul receiving it very early.

    The British Biblical scholar Michael Goulder states that the 1 Corinthians 15 creed “goes back at least to what Paul taught when he was converted, a couple of years after the crucifixion.”(14) Professor Ulrich Wilkins states that this material, indubitably goes back to the oldest phase of all in the history of prim­itive Christianity.”(15) The scholar Walter Kasper contends that this creed was circulating by the end of A.D. 30.(16) The notable atheist New Testament critic Gerd Lüdemann states:

    “… the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion…not later than three years after the death of Jesus.”(17)

    Liberal scholar James D.G. Dunn states:

    “This tradition, we can be entirely confident, was formulated as a tradition within months of Jesus’ death.”(18)

    Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz state:

    “The analysis of the formula tradition about the resurrection of Jesus allows the following conclusion: a tradition in 1 Cor 15.3b-5, which goes back very close to the events themselves, attests appearances to both individuals and groups. The credibility of this tradition is enhanced, because it is in part confirmed by the narrative tradition, which is independent, and because in the case of Paul we have the personal testimony of an eye-witness who knew many of the other witnesses.”(19)

    “It is almost universally agreed today that Paul is here citing tradition.”(20)

    The eminent scholar F.F. Bruce also argues that Paul received this creed from Peter and James in A.D. 35:

    “In that list two individuals are mentioned by name as having seen the risen Christ, and two only: ‘he appeared Cephas’ and ‘he appeared to James’ (1 Corinthians 15:5, 7). It is no mere coincidence that there should be the only two apostles whom Paul claims to have seen during his first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion [in Gal 1:19]… It was almost certainly during these fifteen days in Jerusalem that Paul received this outline.”(21)

    In his 1999 work, The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus, p. 466, the radical liberal Jesus Seminar co-founder Dr. Robert Funk states that the 1 Corinthians 15 creed was formulated within “two or three years at most.” Two or three years after Jesus’ crucifixion, that is.

    Therefore scholarship is quite clear on the 1 Corinthians 15 creed being extremely early tradition formulated close to the time of Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. This utterly refutes the concept of “Pauline Christianity” and demonstrates that Paul’s Gospel and theology (Jesus dying for sins and raising from the dead) is the original early apostolic Gospel according to the 1 st century data.

    The Original Apostles confirmed Paul’s Gospel and Apostleship

    The 1st century historical documentation on this issue also shows that fourteen years after the Jerusalem affair with Peter and James in Galatians 1:15-19 Paul then went back to Jerusalem again with Barnabas and Titus. According to the 1 st century data Paul says the pillars of the church (James, Peter and John) “added nothing to me” (Gal. 2:6). This means that the original Apostles of Jesus added no correction to Paul’s Gospel message which he was preaching after the Jerusalem affair in A.D. 35. Hence, the original Apostles affirmed what Paul was preaching – namely Jesus’ crucifixion as a sacrifice for sins and His resurrection as orthodox theology. Moreover, James, Peter and John all extended their right hand of fellowship to Paul after seeing Paul’s grace (Gal. 2:9). This extremely early data (A.D. 49-54) is a severe blow to the anti-Pauline crowd since it adds one more attestation to the conclusive 1 st century case for Paul’s reliability and apostleship. It must be stressed over and over, because it is important, that there is no clear 1st century documentation to the contrary asserting that Paul was not a true Apostle who was close to the original Apostles or that he had a false message. With respect to scholarship’s view on this issue the secular historian William Durant states:

    “No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in his flesh.”(22)

    Early Extra-Biblical Sources Affirming Paul’s Apostleship

    Now that we have covered some of the Biblical data that validates Paul’s apostleship I want to consider the early historical evidence outside of the Bible which affirms Paul as a genuine Apostle. An important and often overlooked consideration to observe in this study has to do with expectations. If Paul was in fact genuine, as I contend, we would expect to find extremely early church writers affirming the apostleship of Paul as well as quoting his epistles as being authoritative, on same level as Scripture, or directly as Scripture. This is precisely what we find as the evidence is examined. If Paul was not a true Apostle then we would not expect to find numerous instances of the earliest extra-biblical writers (who were often students of the original Apostles) affirming Paul’s apostleship and viewing his writings as Scripture. If Paul was not a true Apostle, but was instead a false usurper, we would expect at least some evidence from the 1 st century followers of Jesus and the Apostles to state their case in opposition Paul relegating him to the status of imposter. However, the earliest evidence is conclusive in affirming Paul’s reliability.

    Ignatius of Antioch (A.D. 35-110)

    Ignatius of Antioch was a 1 st century pupil of the original Apostles.(23) This is important because if Paul was a false teacher and usurper, Ignatius, being a follower of the Apostles and their Gospel (he often quoted the Gospels of Matthew and John as well), would have pointed out Paul’s supposed theological errors or commented on Paul being a supposed false Apostle. However, this 1 st century martyr Bishop offers early data in support of Paul’s association with the other Apostles as well as Paul’s rightful authority in the church. Ignatius wrote the following in A.D. 110 to the Christians in Rome:

    “I do not command you, as Peter and Paul did.”(24)

    This extremely early material is affirming that Paul worked alongside Peter in leading and commanding the Christian church in Rome. Ignatius has other valuable remarks affirming the reliability of the Apostle Paul. For example, in writing to the Christians in Ephesus Ignatius relays that Paul accurately gave the Gospel to the Ephesians, that Paul was martyred for his faith (which also shows Paul’s reliability) as well as his deep respect and honor for Paul:

    “You are initiated into the mysteries of the Gospel with Paul, the holy, the martyred, the deservedly most happy, at whose feet may I be found, when I shall attain to God who in all his Epistles makes mention of you in Christ Jesus.”(25)

    Ignatius often quotes Paul’s epistles as authoritative writings thus demonstrating that Paul was viewed positively in the earliest strand of 1 st century Christianity. For example in Ignatius’ Letter to the Ephesians Ch. 18 he quotes 1 Corinthians 1:20, he states: “Where is the wise man? Where the disputer? Where is the boasting of those who are styled prudent? Four our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water.” 1 Corinthians 1:20 states: Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” In Ignatius’ Letter to the Magnesians Ch. 11 he quotes 1 Timothy 1:1, he states: “Jesus Christ, who is our hope, from which may no one of you ever be turned aside.” 1 Timothy 1:1 states: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope.” In Ignatius’ Letter to Polycarp Ch. 5 he quotes Ephesians 5:25, he states: “In like manner also, exhort my brethren, in the name of Jesus Christ, that they love their wives, even as the Lord the Church.” Ephesians 5:25 states: Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” In the same Letter to Polycarp Ch. 1 Ignatius quotes 1 Thessalonians 5:17, he states: “Give yourself to prayer without ceasing." 1 Thessalonians 5:17 states: “pray without ceasing.”

    We know that Ignatius was fed to lions in a Roman coliseum for his faith since Christianity was being persecuted by the Roman state.(26) This shows that Ignatius so firmly believed in his theology (which included Paul as a true Apostle with inspired doctrine) that he was willing to be martyred for it. If he knew Paul was an imposter or deceiver he would not be willing to be martyred for his faith. As the saying goes “liars make poor martyrs.” If he wasn’t absolutely sure that Paul was genuine he would not be willing to die for a faith or theology which included Paul as a true Apostle. Hence, the conspiracy theory hypothesis won’t work, nor will the “lack of certainty” hypothesis. It is absurd to say that early fathers like this were in on some conspiracy to introduce Paul to people while supposedly knowing he was an imposter. The only way to get around the evidence would be to discard the evidence, which is extremely irresponsible, or to assert that Ignatius was misled or deceived to accept Paul. But that doesn’t work either because Ignatius was very familiar with the theology of John and the other apostles, other apostolic texts, as well as Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels. So if Paul was teaching something contrary to the apostolic 1st century message and was not accepted by the original Apostles, Ignatius would not have supported Paul the way he did. Ignatius gives no indication that there were any early disputes amongst the 1 st century Christians about Paul’s reliability.

    Clement of Rome (A.D. ?-101)

    Clement of Rome was a 1 st century Christian secretary of the church at Rome responsible for correspondence with other churches.(27) There is also evidence to suggest that he was a prominent presbyter of the Roman church. Some believe he was the “fellow worker” Paul mentioned in Philippians 4:3. In his work Against Heresies chapter 3, book 3, section 3 Irenaeus, the 2nd century early writer, notes that Clement of Rome knew the original Apostles:

    ". after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles."

    In his letter The First Epistle of Clement also known as First Epistle to the Corinthians written in A.D. 96 Clement states the following about Paul:

    “Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity, compelled to flee,and stoned. After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west, and suffered martyrdom under the prefects. Thus was he removed from the world, and went into the holy place, having proved himself a striking example of patience.”(28)

    “Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because even then parties had been formed among you.”(29)

    Notice that Clement, in representing the beliefs of the 1 st century Church at Rome, grants Paul’s reliability. He mentions Paul’s labours for the Gospel, his persecution for the faith, and his martyrdom. He states that Paul was a “striking example of patience” or in other words “endurance.” Notice also in the second citation that Clement attests to Paul’s reliability in that he calls him a "blessed Apostle," takes Paul’s epistle to the Corinthians as authoritative and valid with respect to Gospel truth, and states that Paul wrote his letter “under the inspiration of the Spirit.” This means Clement, and subsequently those in the 1 st century Church of Rome, believed Paul’s letters to be inspired God-breathed Scripture - canon. We know that Clement knew many of the original Apostles and followed the teachings of the Apostle Peter honoring him deeply.(30) Therefore, why would Clement, who being familiar with the original apostolic message of Peter and the other Apostles(31), grant Paul’s reliability if Paul was preaching something other than what Peter and the other Apostles were preaching? Since Clement knew of Peter and his teaching, why would he affirm Paul if Paul was just some imposter? If Paul was not a genuine Apostle with the true original Gospel, then Clement, knowing the message of Peter and the original Apostles, would have either exposed Paul as an imposter or pointed out his theological errors. There is no indication from Clements pen that there were any 1 st century disputes amongst the 1 st century Christians about Paul’s reliability.

    Polycarp of Smyrna (A.D. 69-155)

    Polycarp was a 1 st century Bishop like Ignatius. He was also a student or pupil of John and the other Apostles. We know this from his writings as well as his contemporary who knew him, Irenaeus (A.D. ?-202). We also know this from Tertullian (A.D. 160-220). Polycarp’s contemporary Irenaeus makes mention of the fact that Polycarp was a Pupil of John and a Pupil of the Apostles being appointed Bishop of the church in Smyrna by the Apostles themselves. Irenaeus also mentions that Polycarp was a martyr for the Christian faith:

    “For, while I was yet a boy, I saw you in Lower Asia with Polycarp, distinguishing yourself in the royal court, and endeavouring to gain his approbation. For I have a more vivid recollection of what occurred at that time than of recent events (inasmuch as the experiences of childhood, keeping pace with the growth of the soul, become incorporated with it) so that I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse— his going out, too, and his coming in— his general mode of life and personal appearance, together with the discourses which he delivered to the people also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord and how he would call their words to remembrance. Whatsoever things he had heard from them respecting the Lord, both with regard to His miraclesand his teaching, Polycarp having thus received [information] from the eye-witnesses of the Word of life, would recount them all in harmony with the Scriptures.”(32)

    “And when the blessed Polycarp was sojourning in Rome in the time of Anicetus, although a slight controversy had arisen among them as to certain other points, they were at once well inclined towards each other [with regard to the matter in hand], not willing that any quarrel should arise between them upon this head. For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp to forego the observance [in his own way], inasmuch as these things had been always [so] observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant nor, on the other hand, could Polycarp succeed in persuading Anicetus to keep [the observance in his way], for he maintained that he was bound to adhere to the usage of the presbyters who preceded him. And in this state of affairs they held fellowship with each other and Anicetus conceded to Polycarp in the Church the celebration of the Eucharist, by way of showing him respect so that they parted in peace one from the other, maintaining peace with the whole Church, both those who did observe [this custom] and those who did not.”(33)

    But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true.”(34)

    In his Epistle to the Philippians Polycarp seems to indicate that he and his church were instructed directly by the Apostles:

    “Let us then serve Him in fear, and with all reverence, even as He Himself has commanded us, and as the apostles who preached the Gospel unto us…”(35)

    A 2 nd century document written around A.D. 156 known as The Martyrdom of Polycarp records his brutal martyrdom showing that he was willing to die for his faith and theology which included Paul as a true Apostle. A burning at the stake failed and he was stabbed:

    “At length, when those wicked men perceived that his body could not be consumed by the fire, they commanded an executioner to go near and pierce him through with a dagger.”(36)

    Therefore, in light of all of this early evidence which demonstrates that Polycarp knew the original Apostles, knew their original 1 st century Gospel message, was appointed Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles and suffered brutal martyrdom for his faith, it is indeed interesting that he would then affirm the Apostle Paul as genuine and sound theologically if Paul was a false Apostle. Polycarp states:

    “For neither I, nor any other such one, can come up to the wisdom of the blessed and glorified Paul. He, when among you, accurately and steadfastly taught the word of truth in the presence of those who were then alive. And when absent from you, he wrote you a letter, which, if you carefully study, you will find to be the means of building you up in that faith which has been given you, and which, being followed by hope, and preceded by love towards God, and Christ, and our neighbour, is the mother of us all.”(37)

    “I exhort you all, therefore, to yield obedience to the of righteousness, and to exercise all patience, such as you have seen [set] before your eyes, not only in the case of the blessed Ignatius, and Zosimus, and Rufus, but also in others among yourselves, and in Paul himself, and the rest of the apostles.”(38)

    “For if a man cannot govern himself in such matters, how shall he enjoin them on others? If a man does not keep himself from covetousness, he shall be defiled by idolatry, and shall be judged as one of the heathen. But who of us are ignorant of the judgment of the Lord? Do we not know that the saints shall judge the world? as Paul teaches. But I have neither seen nor heard of any such thing among you, in the midst of whom the blessed Paul laboured, and who are commended in the beginning of his Epistle. For he boasts of you in all those Churches which alone then knew the Lord but we [of Smyrna] had not yet known him.”(39)

    If Paul was an imposter, then Polycarp, knowing John and the other Apostles as well as their orthodox theology, would have spoken out against Paul. On the other hand if someone asserts that Polycarp was a liar or conspirator trying to mislead people to follow Paul for some nefarious absurd reason then Polycarp would not willingly go to his death for his faith. This evidence is a fatal blow to the egregious falsehood of anti-Pauline critics. Polycarp also identified Paul’s writings as sacred Scripture showing that Paul was viewed as an inspired Apostle by Polycarp and those around him in the 1 st century church. For example, he says the following about Ephesians 4:26:

    “For I trust that you are well versed in the Sacred Scriptures, and that nothing is hid from you but to me this privilege is not yet granted. It is declared then in these Scriptures, Be angry, and sin not, and, Let not the sun go down upon your wrath [Eph. 4:26].”(40)

    It is germane to note that the early church writer Tertullian (A.D. 160-220) also relayed some pertinent information about Polycarp’s status, he states: “For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John.”(41) This shows that it was widely known that Polycarp knew the original disciples. Therefore, the case is quite clear for Polycarp being a student of the original Apostles. That the blessed Polycarp affirmed Paul’s reliability is irrefutable.

    Frequent Gnostic Claims to Authority mean Paul is not Reliable?

    One response Muslims have offered is that there were 2 nd century Gnostics like Valentinus, Montanus, Maximilla and others who claimed to have authority or receive divine prophecy and revelation. Therefore, Muslims argue, since it was common for people to lie and claim to receive prophecy, authority, and revelation one should not accept Paul. However, this is just the logical fallacy known as the problem of induction fallacy. Just because it is doubtful that these 2 nd century people had true apostolic authority and received visions and revelation it doesn’t therefore prove that Paul was false. That would be like saying because my cat is orange therefore all cats must be orange.

    Secondly, this is a fallacious argument because such Gnostics are 2 nd century. Paul is 1 st century. There are no meaningful multiply attested 1 st or early 2 nd century sources saying these people or their followers knew the original Apostles and were accepted by them. There is a wealth of multiply attested 1 st and early 2 nd century evidence affirming that Paul and his followers knew the Apostles and were accepted by them. There is no meaningful 1 st century evidence that Valentinus, Montanus and Maximilla saw visions of the risen Lord. There is a wealth of 1 st century evidence that Paul saw a vision of the risen Lord. There is no evidence whatsoever that Valentinus, Montanus and Maximilla were willingly martyred for their faith. There is reliable 1 st and early 2 nd century evidence that Paul and his followers were willingly martyred for their faith. Historians are interested in early multiply attested accounts. That is why Paul is reliable. To discard these historical principles is to show incredible bias and demonstrate that one is not interested in what the earliest data says. In light of these facts one can not compare Paul to these later 2 nd century Gnostics since the historical evidence is clearly in favour of Paul.

    Section 2. Critiquing the Muslim Misuse of the Ebionites

    Are the Ebionites and their Claims 1 st Century?

    Since it is clear that the 1 st century case for Paul’s apostleship is strong, Muslims have tried to find some kind of clear 1 st century proof that would legitimately discredit Paul as a true Apostle. Their main argument or claim is that an early sect called the Ebionites rejected Paul while claiming to have apostolic authority. It is true that this aberrant sect rejected Paul and there is some evidence to suggest that they claimed to have apostolic authority in that they believed their views were sanctioned by the Apostle James. However, what I will be demonstrating is that Muslims are incorrect for dating this sect and their gospel/beliefs to the 1 st century, that the Ebionites were complete antichrist heretics not only according to Christianity but also to Islam, and finally I will show that their absurd reason for denying Paul is not reliable historically.

    The original gospel of the Ebionites is lost and we have no works from any of their followers. What we do have is quotations of their gospel and refutations of their beliefs from a 4 th century work known as Panarion which was written by the Christian writer Epiphanius of Salamis (A.D. 310/320 – 403). It is agreed that their gospel was a forged mutilated document which quoted from Matthew, Luke and Mark. In it are insertions/interpolations of their own narrations and beliefs as well. Various writers like the 2 nd century church father Irenaeus wrote on the Ebionites in his work Against Heresies Book 1 Ch. 26 asserting that “they practise circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life.” The same source also affirms that they” repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law.” However, Irenaeus does not indicate that the Ebionites go back to the 1 st century. In his work De Principiis Book 4 the church father Origen (A.D. 185-254) also mentions the Ebionites and says their name [Ebion] means “poor.” Origen also mentions them in his work Against Celsus. The 3 rd /4 th century historian Eusebius mentions them in his work Church History etc. Although Muslim apologists like Nadir Ahmed, whom I debated on this issue years ago, assert that the Ebionite testimony is 1 st century testimony, scholars like Dr. Ron Cameron date the gospel of the Ebionites to the mid 2 nd century. In his work The Other Gospels: Non-canonical Gospel Texts Dr. Cameron states:

    “The Gospel of the Ebionites was composed sometime after the Gospel of Matthew and Luke and before the first reference to it in the writings of Irenaeus (toward the end of the second century). A date of composition in the middle of the second century, when several other gospel harmonies were also being written, is most likely.”(42)

    Cameron also notes that the Ebionites were “a group of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians who were prominent through out the second and third centuries.”(43) Dr. Geoffrey W. Bromily notes that the Ebionites were “flourishing in the 2 nd , 3 rd and 4 th cents. A.D.”(44) In the same work Dr. Bromily also dates the Gospel of the Ebionites to the 2 nd century. In his work Apocryphal Gospels: an Introduction Dr. Hans Josef Klauck states that the gospel of the Ebionites was “composed most probably in the mid-second century.”(45) It must be stressed that it is widely acknowledged that there is no firm historical material proving that the Ebionite sect itself dates to the 1 st century. Dr. Bart Ehrman has offered some speculation on this issue, however. Because he feels that some of their beliefs are somewhat similar to those of the 1 st century Galatians that Paul was in opposition to, that maybe the Ebionites are the physical and spiritual descendents of the Galatians.(46) However, Ehrman doesn’t attempt to trace such a line of descent with any meaningful historical evidence. One Muslim apologist, Sami Zaatari, feels that this speculation from Ehrman is enough to prove that “the Ebionites do have a foundation even during the time of Paul.”(47) However, Ehrman himself is not even sure if there were Ebionites at the time when Paul disputed with the Galatians in the 1 st century since he says things like, “… if these (Christian) Jews were in existence before the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 CE…”(48) The fact is that there just is no real solid evidence tracing the Ebionite tribes to the 1 st century. They emerged in the 2 nd century and so therefore their assertions about Paul not being a true Apostle are merely late opinions far removed from the time of the Apostles. The evidence shows that it wasn’t until Paul was already dead when their fanciful distortions about him emerged.

    In fact, the earliest mention of their rejection of Paul comes from Irenaeus’ late 2 nd century work Against Heresies and so therefore we have no evidence that their rejection of Paul wasn’t just some 2 nd century novelty. Some people argue that the Ebionites can be traced back to 1 st century Jerusalem because in Against Heresies Book 1 Ch. 26 Irenaeus reports that “they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God.” However, Sakari Hakkinen states that the “… expression means the typical prayer orientation towards Jerusalem and it cannot be used as evidence of the origins of the Ebionites in Jerusalem. As the Ebionites were committed to Jewish traditions, it was natural that they also prayed like Jews.”(49) In his detailed treatment on the subject Dr. Joseph A. Fitzmyer sums up the current scholarly position saying, “… there is simply no evidence for their existence in the first century A.D., either before or after the destruction of Jerusalem.” (50)

    Damaging Heresies of the Ebionites

    The fact that the Ebionites were abominable heretics according to both Islamic and orthodox Christian theology should make people question why Muslims use their late singular non-multiply attested testimony against Paul as evidence. Paul warned about potential heretics who would come and forbid the eating of meat and things of this nature:

    “ 1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy having their conscience seared with a hot iron 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” (1 Timothy 4:1-3)

    The Ebionites altered Mark 14:12-15 in their 2 nd century gospel (the gospel of the Ebionites) to try to make Jesus a vegetarian suiting their heretical practices. As Epiphanius notes:

    And the Lord himself says, ‘Go ye into the city, and ye shall find a man bearing a pitcher of water and ye shall follow whithersoever he goeth, and say ye to the Goodman of the house, Where is the guest-chamber, where I shall keep the Passover with my disciples? And he shall show you an upper room furnished there make ready.’ But the Lord says in turn, ‘With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you.’ And he said, ‘this Passover,’ not simply ‘Passover,” so that no one would practice it in accordance with his own notion. Passover, as I said, was roast meat and the rest. But of their own will these people have lost sight of the consequence of the truth, and have altered the wording-which is evident to everyone from the sayings associated with it-and made the disciples say, ‘Where wilt thou that we prepare for three to eat the Passover?’ And the Lord, if you please, says, ‘Have I desired meat with desire, to eat this Passover with you?’”(51)

    This severely damages the credibility of the Ebionites showing that they were deceptive and dishonest. This gives further reason to question their claims about Paul. Moreover, in Origen’s (A.D. 185-254) work Against Celsus he notes that there were different sects of Ebionites, many of which denied the virgin birth of Jesus. Origen mentions the “… the twofold sect of Ebionites, who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of a virgin, or deny this, and maintain that He was begotten like other human beings.”(52) This is heresy. Isaiah 7:14 predicts that, “… the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Luke 1:32-35 also condemns the Ebionites:

    “ 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end." 34 And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?" 35 And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you therefore the child to be born will be called holy--the Son of God.”(Luke 1:32-35)

    The Quran also condemns these Ebionites by admitting that Jesus had a virgin birth in Quran 19:19-22 which states:

    He said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son. She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste? He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. And (it will be) that We may make of him a revelation for mankind and a mercy from Us, and it is a thing ordained. And she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a far place.” (S. 19:19-22)

    The Ebionites held to numerous heresies about Jesus including their claim that Jesus was the person of Adam or a created spirit who was higher than the angels. Epiphanius states:

    “For some of them even say that Adam is Christ-the man who was formed first and infused with God’s breath. But others among them say that Christ is from above that he was created before all things that he is a spirit, higher than the angels and ruler of all that he is called Christ, and the world there is his portion. But he comes here when he chooses, as he came in Adam and appeared to the patriarchs with Adam’s body on. And in the last days the same Christ who had come to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, came and put on Adam’s body, and he appeared to men, was crucified, rose and ascended.”(53)

    This type of apostasy is condemned in John 1:1-3 which affirms that Jesus is the incarnate God when it states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made.” See also Philippians 2:6-11. This Ebionite heresy is also condemned by Islamic teaching. Quran 5:75 asserts that Jesus was just a human messenger like those who passed away before him, not Adam or a pre-existent exalted spirit:

    The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away.” (S. 5:75 Pickthall)

    Lastly, a Muslim writer named Abdullah Smith claims that the Ebionites “did not believe Jesus was God, or the ‘son of God.’”(54) However, historians realize that the Ebionites did believe Jesus was the adopted Son of God – a heresy according to both Christianity and Islam. The gospel of the Ebionites alludes to the Baptism of Jesus saying, “… a voice sounded from Heaven that said: ‘You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased.’ And again: ‘I have this day begotten you.”(55) They took this and affirmed a form of Adoptionism. According to Christianity Jesus is the eternal divine Son of God bearing the nature of God (Proverbs 30: 3-4 Isaiah 9:6 1 John 5:20) not the adopted Son. And according to Islam Jesus is not the Son of God in any sense (S. 6:101 112:1-4).

    Therefore, one must question the integrity of any Muslim who would appeal to these antichrist heretics for reliable information on Paul. These 2 nd century apostates are unreliable heretics according to both Islam and Christianity and therefore the Muslim apologists ought to stop appealing to them and their opinions as if they somehow represented early orthodox Christian belief. They clearly did not.

    The Absurd Ebionite Charge Against Paul

    One would expect some kind of meaningful widely acknowledged reason as to why the Ebionites would reject Paul in light of all of the early evidence proving that he was reliable. However, the reason given to us by the Ebionites as to why they asserted that Paul was not a true Apostle is so absurd and outlandish that it makes me question why any Muslim would appeal to their opinions as an argument. Epiphanius writing in the 4 th century reports the following Ebionite charge:

    "[The Ebionites] declare that he [Paul] was a Greek [. ] He went up to Jerusalem, they say, and when he had spent some time there, he was seized with a passion to marry the daughter of the priest. For this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then, when he failed to get the girl, he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision and against the sabbath and the Law."(56)

    Obviously this is a late concocted fable. It is quite remarkable that this is basis for their bold rejection of Paul. This absurd charge reported in the 4 th century by Epiphanius comes from an earlier lost Ebionite source called The Ascents of James. However, this source, which is the original source that this Ebionite fable comes from, is neither early nor reliable. Dr. Georg Strecker and Dr. Robert Van Voorst date the document to A.D. 150-200 and affirm that it was written in Pella in Transjordan. In their work The Brother of Jesus: James the Just and his Mission Bruce Chilton and Jacob Neusner note that this is the “consensus view on the date and place of origin of the Ascents…”(57) Therefore, this charge against Paul is not reliable historically and thus we have great reason to question the Ebionite claims about Paul.

    This Pauline fable is not multiply attested by any other source in the 1 st or 2 nd centuries. Therefore, this charge against Paul not only fails the historical test of early accounts and early eyewitness testimony, but it also fails the test of multiple independent attestation. The 1 st century evidence I discussed earlier flies in the face of this absurd claim as well – rendering it impossible since the orthodox evidenced view has Paul as a true Apostle and martyr for the faith. Based on the nature of this fanciful charge it seems that the Ebionites were hard pressed for any real convincing evidence or argumentation against Paul’s reliability and so after Paul was dead and not able to defend himself, the Ebionites invented this story to justify their heresies and their rejection of Paul’s 1 st century apostolic teachings of grace and faith. There is no evidence to suggest that this kind of anti-Pauline Ebionite thinking was part of any major strand of early 1 st century Christian teaching - none whatsoever. There is a wide and broad scholarly view for this absurd Ebionite charge against Paul being a later fabricated legend, story or development as opposed to historical reality.(58)

    Section 3. Early Muslim Sources Affirming the Apostleship of Paul

    In this section I will seek to demonstrate that modern Muslims are in error for rejecting the Apostle Paul since there are major strands of early Islamic tradition that grant Paul’s reliability. Let us first turn our attention to the Quran itself. Many are unaware that the Quran gives an indirect argument for Paul’s reliability:

    "Behold! Allah said: 'O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the day of resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto Me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.'" (S. 3:55)

    "O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah: as said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, "Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?" Said the Disciples, "We are Allah's helpers!" then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed." (S. 61:14)

    Here the Quran demonstrates that Paul was a true Apostle as well as a true follower of Jesus since these two texts state that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to until the day of resurrection and that the true early Israelites who followed Jesus would be given power against their enemies and prevail over all other beliefs. However, we know historically that the followers of Jesus who prevailed and who were superior were those who followed Apostles like Paul along with the rest of the 12 Apostles. This means that Paul's message was the true message since it became dominant and prevailed along with the Christians who affirmed it. Muslim apologist Nadir Ahmed demonstrates the point and unknowingly proves that Paul is a true Apostle and that his followers were correct according to the Quran:

    “To make a long story short, Paul’schurch eventually beat out its competitors, and arose as the sole victorious Church which is present today.”(59)

    Moreover, the Quran nowhere mentions the Apostle Paul by name or condemns him by name. Muhammad’s ignorance of the 1 st century may explain why this is so. But, for argument sake I would pose the following question to the Muslims who believe that Allah is the author of the Quran: If Paul was a false Apostle and major corruptor of early Christianity then why didn’t Allah mention this explicitly and warn people about Paul or inform Muslims about how he supposedly corrupted Christianity? I contend that this is a later development. In fact it seems that the Quran has absolutely no knowledge of these issues. In my debate with the Muslim apologist Nadir Ahmed he posed a response to the previous argument without actually dealing with the substance of S. 3:55 and 61:14. He argued that Muhammad taught that there was no prophet between Jesus and Muhammad and since Paul fits the description of Prophet, Islam rejects Paul indirectly. Sahih Muslim states:

    "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I am most akin to the son of Mary among the whole of mankind and the Prophets are of different mothers, but of one religion, and no Prophet was raised between me and him (Jesus Christ)."

    However, all this shows is that the Islamic sources contradict themselves, nothing more. On the one hand the Quran affirms Paul’s reliability indirectly. On the other hand a Hadith rejects him indirectly. All this does is show a contradiction in the Islamic sources that Muslims need to reconcile. It doesn’t refute the fact that the Quran indirectly affirms Paul’s reliability. Moreover, although Paul had the characteristics of a prophet, Christians didn’t really view him in the same category as Moses or Isaiah but instead viewed him in the category of Apostles like Peter or James and so it is unlikely that this Hadith in Sahih Muslim even had Paul in mind. If this narration amounts to a rejection of Paul, then it likewise rejects Peter and John and all of the Apostles of Jesus. Suddenly, we are left with no Apostles at all. Clearly, the context of that Hadith in question has nothing to do with Paul.

    Commenting on S. 61:14 the respected Islamic commentator Al-Qurtubi grants the apostleship of Paul:

    It was said that this verse was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter and Paul who went to Rome Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands Philip who went to Africa John went to Dac-sos(?) which is the tribe to whom the sleepers of the cave belonged Jacob went to Jerusalem Bartholomew went to the lands of Arabia, specifically Al-Hijaz Simon who went to the Barbarians Judas and Barthas(?) who went to Alexandria and its surrounding regions.”(60)

    Notice that this ancient Muslim tradition has Paul as a true apostle. If Muhammad and the early Muslims taught that it was a priority to view Paul as a false usurper whose teachings were to be avoided then we would not expect to find these ancient Muslim traditions which grant Paul’s reliability. If it were a clear Muslim doctrine in the 7 th and 8 th centuries to reject Paul as the corrupter of Christianity then one would not expect to find comments like this from Al-Qurtubi and Ibn Ishaq. In a separate work, The Life of Muhammad, the 8 th century Muslims historian Ibn Ishaq reports a tradition informing us about a popular early Muslim view about Paul:

    "Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple and Paul with him, (Paul belonged to the followers and was not a disciple) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east Philip to Carthage which is Africa John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz Simon to the land of the Berbers Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas."(61)

    Similarly the 9 th century Islamic exegete and historian al-Tabari has this to say of Paul:

    "Among the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the Apostle Peter and Paul who was a follower and not an apostle they went to Rome. Andrew and Matthew were sent to the country whose people are man-eaters, a land of blacks, we think Thomas was sent to Babylonia in the east, Philip to Qayrawan (and) Carthage, that is, North Africa. John went to Ephesus, the city of the youths of the cave, and James to Jerusalem, that is, Aelia. Bartholomew was sent to Arabia, namely, the Hijaz Simeon to the land of the Berbers in Africa. Judas was not then an apostle, so his place was taken by Ariobus. He filled in for Judas Iscariot after the latter had perpetrated his deed."(62)

    Sam Shamoun has offered a detailed discussion(63) on the subject of early Islam’s view of Paul wherein he states that with respect to this kind of identification of Paul as a follower and not a disciple, that this is in no way meant to discredit Paul or defame him. Shamoun notes that the translator of al-Tabari’s history, Moshe Perlmann, comments on this saying that, “[i]n Islamic terms the messengers or apostles pave the new path. Their work is continued by the tabi'un, the followers, members of the next generations, who lead the Faithful.”(64) Therefore, by identifying Paul as a follower and not an apostle, this has nothing to do with questioning Paul’s status or reliability – it has to do with his sequential chronology. It is very interesting that although later generations of Muslims are quick to attack the Apostle Paul, the evidence shows that there was an early strand of Islamic tradition reported by some of Islam’s greatest sources granting the reliability of the Apostle Paul.

    Al-Tabari also states that Paul was martyred for his faith which further shows his credibility as well as early Islam’s support of Paul and Jesus’ Apostles:

    “Abu Ja'far says: They assert that after Tiberius, Palestine and other parts of Syria were ruled by Gaius, son of Tiberius, for four years. He was succeeded by another son, Claudius, for fourteen years, following which Nero ruled for fourteen years. He slew Peter and crucified Paul head down. For four months Botlaius [Vittelius] ruled thereafter.”(65)

    What must be stressed about all of this data is that if the orthodox Muslim understanding at the time was an emphatic recognition that Paul was a usurper or corrupter, we simply would not see references like this about Paul being an Apostle or follower of Jesus. These writings demonstrate that the anti-Pauline sentiment we see from Muslims today is not based on any clear teaching of Muhammad or early Islam, it is the product of a process of development in trying to solve the problem as to why Christianity is different than Islam.

    For further reading on the issue of early Islam’s view on Paul as well as a comparison between Paul’s theology and Jesus’ theology, proving that they taught the same things, see the following articles:

    Conclusion

    In this article we have seen that the 1 st century Biblical data on Paul is unanimous and clear. We saw that it contains pertinent information which historians find persuasive in demonstrating that Paul was reliable. We saw that the early extra-biblical testimony from those who knew the Apostles or who were familiar with their views and writings affirmed Paul’s reliability. We saw that these early martyrs truly believed in their theology which included Paul as a true Apostle and were willing to die for that belief. We saw that the Muslim utilization of the Ebionites’ testimony as an argument is hopelessly fallacious in light of the evidence and the consensus of scholarship which shows that the Ebionites, their gospel, and their beliefs are unreliable and 2 nd century - not 1 st century. We saw that the Ebionites were unreliable deceptive heretics according to both Islamic and Christian theology who even altered the Gospel of Mark to suit their heretical views. We saw that they held to numerous damnable heresies. We saw that their rejection of Paul is not reliable in that they invented 2 nd century fables about him that have no basis in reality. We saw that serious scholarship is clear in rejecting their testimony and placing them and their material in the 2 nd century. And lastly we saw that there is a very early strand of Islamic tradition that grants the validity of the Apostle Paul. I honestly feel that the Muslim has absolutely no historical basis for rejecting Paul’s apostleship but that they are forced to do so because of sustainability and philosophical or faith reasons.

    Christ has risen, He is Lord!

    1.) In Quran 7:157 Muslims are told that Muhammad is allegedly “described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. ” This assumes that the Gospel which was with the Christians in the 7 th century (the same Gospel we have today) is reliable. There is no historical proof for 7 th century Christians reading any other Gospel than the New Testament material. Hence, this demonstrates that the Quran taught that the New Testament was not some corrupt document as Muslims would later claim. In Quran 5:68 the Muslims are told that 7 th century Jews and Christians ought to listen to Allah and “perform the Torah and the Gospel [Injil], and what was sent down to you from your Lord…” This again assumes that the 7 th century Scriptures that Christians were reading (the New Testament) was in its pristine form and could be accurately performed. In Quran 6:114 we are told that, “Those unto whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth.” This again shows that the 7 th century Gospel that Christians read was reliable and not some corrupt text as later Muslims would assert.

    2.) It is important to note that 2 Peter itself is not an unnamed work. In 1:1 it states: “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.” Therefore, when early Christians alluded to it or quoted it as an authoritative text they are giving implicit recognition of its Petrine authorship which it claims for itself. Many hold that the extremely early 1 st century extra-biblical document known as the Letter to the Corinthians written by Clement of Rome alludes to 2 Peter 2:5. The Letter to the Corinthians Ch. 7 states: “Noah preached repentance, and as many as listened to him were saved.” This seems to be an allusion to 2 Peter 2:5 which says: “And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.” This demonstrates that those in the 1st century Church of Rome like Clement believed 2 Peter to be authoritative and Petrine. Another extra-biblical Christian text from A.D. 100 known as the Epistle of Barnabas in Ch. 15 states: “This implies that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years.” This is a quotation of 2 Peter 3:8 which states: “…with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” This shows that the Christian author of the Epistle of Barnabas held 2 Peter to be authoritative and Petrine. Examples of patristic writings quoting 2 Peter include Irenaeus’ quotation of 2 Peter 3:8 in his work Against Heresies Book 5 Ch. 28. The 2 nd /3 rd century church father Clement of Alexandria seems to allude to 2 Peter 2:5 in his work The Stromata Book 1 Ch. 21. The 3 rd century church father Cyprian quotes 2 Peter 2:11-12 in his work Treatises of Cyprian Treatise 12 Ch.11 and calls this work “The Epistle of Peter.” This shows that Cyprian and those around him viewed 2 Peter as a Petrine document. Papyrus 72 or P72 is a 3 rd /4 th century Greek manuscript which was found in Egypt and it contains sections of 2 Peter demonstrating that these early Christians regarded 2 Peter as canonical, authentic and Petrine. The Coptic Sahidic translation of the Bible contained 2 Peter. Scholars like Dr. Horner and Dr. Hornack state that the Coptic Sahidic translation of the Bible is 2nd century. This again shows that early tradition has it so that 2 Peter was authoritative and authentic among many early Christians. The Apocalypse of Peter is a 2 nd century extra-biblical Christian-Gnostic apocalyptic work which drew from 2 Peter demonstrating that the author believed 2 Peter to be authoritative and possibly Petrine.

    3.) Examples of Jesus and the Apostles preaching repentance, holiness and sanctification (being set apart from the world) can be found in Luke 13:5: “No, I tell you but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." Matthew 7:21: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 10:38: “And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” Matthew 16:24: “Then Jesus told his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” Acts 2:38: “And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you. ” James 1:21: “Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.” 1 John 1:6: “If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.” Jude 1:14: “It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him." 16These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage. 17But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. 18They said to you, "In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions." 19It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. 20But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.” Revelation 2:5: “Remember therefore from where you have fallen repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.”

    4.) Dr. Geoffrey W. Bromiley states: “… Pelagius concluded that Christian perfection was not only a possibility for all believers – it was also the expected result of moral effort.” Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1995], p. 325

    5.) Examples would be King David in Psalm 51:2-5: “Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! 3For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. 4Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment. 5Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Another example would be King Solomon’s lapse into sin and his subsequent repentance in 1 Kings 11:4-6 “4For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods and his heart was not perfect with Jehovah his God, as was the heart of David his father. 5For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. 6And Solomon did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and went not fully after Jehovah, as did David his father.” Solomon’s repentant heart is evident in the book of Ecclesiastes. The Apostle Peter sinned by denying the Lord three times. He then wept bitterly and was then reinstated as a prime Apostle by Jesus Himself as is evidenced in Matthew 26:73-75: “73After a little while the bystanders came up and said to Peter, "Certainly you too are one of them, for your accent betrays you." 74Then he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear, "I do not know the man." And immediately the rooster crowed. 75And Peter remembered the saying of Jesus, "Before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times." And he went out and wept bitterly.” Jesus re-instated the repentant Peter in John 21:15-17 where Peter showed his love for the Lord Jesus.

    6.) As opposed to being self righteous, prideful and dishonest, Jesus taught that salvation is attained when a person humbles themselves, admits that they are sinners and seeks God’s righteousness remaining repentant and reliant on God’s grace. Luke 18:9-14 "14He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week I give tithes of all that I get.' 13But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' 14I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

    7.) First, Jesus Himself taught that Peter would die a faithful man following God in John 21:18-19 which demonstrates that Peter learned from his mistake with Paul in Galatians 2:11-14 and was put back on the path of righteousness for the remainder of his life: “18Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go." 19(This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.) And after saying this he said to him, "Follow me." Moreover, there is early extra-biblical material which mentions Peter and Paul simultaneously teaching the Christians in Rome. This proves that Peter and Paul reconciled their past differences (the Galatians 2:11-14 dispute). This is evidenced in the 1 st century document known as The Letter to the Romans written by Ignatius of Antioch who was a pupil of the Apostles: “I do not command you, as Peter and Paul did” (Ch. 4). Moreover, the 2 nd century church father Irenaeus reports an ancient tradition about Peter and Paul’s time in Rome together demonstrating that they remained close despite their conflict in Galatians 2:11-14. Irenaeus states: “…by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies Book 3 Ch. 3) Their martyrdom’s in Rome are documented by Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians Ch. 5: “Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity, compelled to flee, and stoned. After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west, and suffered martyrdom under the prefects. Thus was he removed from the world, and went into the holy place, having proved himself a striking example of patience.” This evidence serves as weighty proof for the fact that despite Peter and Paul’s dispute in Galatians 2:11-14, they remained close friends and fellow Apostles in life.

    8.) Dr. Ben Witherington III, The Paul Quest: The Renewed Search for the Jew of Tarsus, [InterVarsity Press, 2001], p. 305

    9.) In his work The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, p. 318 Dr. Mike Licona notes that A.D. 30 is the “more standard dating.”

    10.) Dr. Craig L. Blomberg argues for this date in “The Case for Christ”, [Zondervan, 1998], p. 35

    11.) Dr. Gary. R. Habermas, David J. Baggett, Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew, [InterVarsity Press, 2009], p. 35

    12.) Howard Clark Kee, What can We Know about Jesus? [Cambridge University Press, 1990], pp. 1-2

    13.) Dr. Gary Habermas notes: “The most popular view among scholars is that Paul first received this very early material when he visited Jerusalem just three years after his conversion.” Gary R. Habermas, To Everyone an Answer: A Case for the Christian Worldview: Essays in Honor of Norman L. Geisler, [InterVarsity Press, 2004], p. 183. Other less popular theories as to where Paul got the 1 Corinthians 15 creed have been listed by Dr. Mike Licona: “Paul appears to have visited Jerusalem perhaps two more times prior to writing 1 Corinthians (Acts 11:27-30 15:1-29 Gal 2:1-20). On the occasion mentioned in Galatians, Paul met with the Jerusalem leadership in private. If Acts 15:1-29 reports the same visit, his interaction with the Jerusalem leadership went beyond his interaction described in Galatians 2. Paul could have been the recipient of tradition during these visits. Even more possibilities exist. He may have received some of the tradition from Barnabas or James during his first postconversion visit to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26-29 Gal 1:19). In Galatians 2:11 Paul reports a visit by Peter to Antioch. Paul may have received tradition from Peter or from one of those who had accompanied him during this time. In Acts 11:25-30 and 12:25-15:30, Luke reports that Paul and Barnabas spent a significant amount of time together. Paul could have received tradition from this Jerusalem leader during this period.” See Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, [InterVarsity Press, 2010], pp. 231-232 for a few more additional views as to where Paul got the creed.

    14.) Michael Goulder, “The Baseless Fabric of a Vision.” Resurrection Reconsidered, ed. Gavin D’Costa, [Oneworth, 1996], p. 48

    15.) Ulrich Wilckens, Resurrection: Biblical Testimony to the Resurrection: An Historical Examina­tion and Explanation, [St. Andrew Press, 1977], p. 2

    16.) Walter Kaspar, Jesus the Christ, trans. V. Green, [Paulist, 1976], p. 125

    17.) Gerd Lüdemann, The Resurrection of Jesus, trans. John Bowden, [Fortress, 1994], p. 38

    18.) James D.G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003], p. 825

    19.) Gerd Theissen, Annette Merz, The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide, [SCM Press, 1998], p. 490

    20.) Reginald Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives, [Macmillan, 1980], p. 10

    21.) Frederick Fyvie Bruce, Paul, Apostle of the Heart Set Free, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000], pp. 85-86

    22.) William Durant, The Story of Civilization, Caesar and Christ, vol. 3, [Simon & Schuster, 1972], p. 555

    23.) In the early document known as The Martyrdom of Ignatius Ch. 1 we read: “… Ignatius, the disciple of John the apostle, a man in all respects of an apostolic character, governed the Church of the Antiochians with great care…” The 3 rd /4 th century church historian Eusebius states that Ignatius was the second Bishop of Antioch after the Apostle Peter, Evodius preceding him, which shows that Ignatius was in very close proximity to the Apostles. Eusebius states: “At this time Ignatius was known as the second Bishop of Antioch, Evodius having been the first. Symeon likewise was at that time the second ruler of the church of Jerusalem, the brother of our Saviour having been the first.”(Eusebius, Church History, Book 3, Ch. 22) And: “…Ignatius, who was chosen bishop of Antioch, second in succession to Peter…” (Eusebius, Church History, Book 3, Ch. 36). The 4 th /5 th century Christian Theodoret also states: “You have no doubt heard of the illustrious Ignatius, who received episcopal grace by the hand of the great Peter, and after ruling the church of Antioch, wore the crown of Martyrdom.” (Theodoret, Dialogues, 1)

    24.) Ignatius, Letter to the Romans, Ch. 4

    25.) Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, Ch. 12

    26.) The fact that Ignatius was willing to die for his faith and theology, which included Paul as an inspired Apostle, comes to us from various early texts. Ch. 5 of his Epistle to the Romans, ironically, is titled “I desire to die.” On his way to be martyred in Rome he states: “From Syria even unto Rome I fight with beasts, both by land and sea, both by night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean a band of soldiers, who, even when they receive benefits, show themselves all the worse. But I am the more instructed by their injuries [to act as a disciple of Christ] yet am I not thereby justified. May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon me, which also I will entice to devour me speedily, and not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so. Pardon me [in this]: I know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a disciple. And let no one, of things visible or invisible, envy me that I should attain to Jesus Christ. Let fire and the cross let the crowds of wild beasts let tearings, breakings, and dislocations of bones let cutting off of members let shatterings of the whole body and let all the dreadful torments of the devil come upon me: only let me attain to Jesus Christ.” In the early document known as The Martyrdom of Ignatius Ch. 6 we read: “Then, being immediately thrown in, according to the command of Cæsar given some time ago, the public spectacles being just about to close (for it was then a solemn day, as they deemed it, being that which is called the thirteenth in the Roman tongue, on which the people were wont to assemble in more than ordinary numbers ), he was thus cast to the wild beasts close beside the temple.” The 3 rd /4 th century church historian Eusebius also mentions Ignatius’ martyrdom: “Report says that he was sent from Syria to Rome, and became food for wild beasts on account of his testimony to Christ.” (Eusebius, Church History, Book 3, Ch. 36)

    27.) The early 2 nd century document known as The Shepherd of Hermas states the following about Clement of Rome: “Write, then, two small booklets, one for Clement and one for Grapte. Clement will then send it to the cities abroad since this is his duty…” (The Shepherd of Hermas, Vision 2, 4)

    28.) Clement, The First Epistle of Clement, Ch. 5

    29.) Clement, The First Epistle of Clement, Ch. 47

    30.) We know Clement followed Peter’s message, considered him a valid Apostle, and honored him: “Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.” (Clement,The First Epistle of Clement, Ch. 5)

    31.) Evidence for Clements familiarity with the teachings of Peter and the other Apostles comes from that fact that in his letter to the Corinthians he quotes or alludes to numerous texts from Peter, the Gospels and the Apostles. For example in Ch. 2 he appeals to 1 Peter 2:17. In Ch. 11 he appeals to 2 Peter 2:6-9. In Ch. 24 he appeals Luke 8:5. In Ch. 27 he appeals Matthew 24:35. In Ch. 31 he appeals to James 2:21. He knew of and followed these apostolic texts and teachings and so if Paul was opposed to them and was not accepted by the Apostles, Clement would either expose Paul or not support him – or both.

    32.) Irenaeus, Letter to Roman Presbyter Florinus

    33.) Irenaeus, Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus, 3

    34.) Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, Ch. 3

    35.) Polycarp, Epistle to the Philippians, Ch. 6

    36.) The Martyrdom of Polycarp, Ch. 16

    37.) Polycarp, Epistle to the Philippians, Ch. 3

    39.) Polycarp, Epistle to the Philippians, Ch. 11

    40.) Polycarp, Epistle to the Philippians, Ch. 12

    41.) Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, Ch. 32

    42.) Ron Cameron, The Other Gospels: Non-canonical Gospel Texts, [Westminster John Knox Press, 1982], p. 104

    44.) Geoffrey W. Bromiley, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: E-J, Vol. 2, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1982], p. 9

    45.) Hans Josef Klauck, Apocryphal Gospels: an Introduction, [Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003], p. 51

    46.) “They also believed that to belong to the people of God, one needed to be Jewish. As a result, they insisted on observing the Sabbath, keeping the kosher, and circumcising all males. That sounds very much like the position taken by the opponents of Paul in Galatia. It may be that the Ebionite Christians were their descendants, physical and spiritual.” Bart, Ehrman, Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths we Never Knew, [Oxford University Press, 2003], p. 100

    48.) Bart, Ehrman, Lost Christianities: the Battles for Scripture and the Faiths we Never Knew, [Oxford University Press, 2003], p. 101

    49.) Sakari Hakkinen, A Companion to Second-Century Christian "Heretics", [BRILL, 2008], p. 271

    50.) Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament, vol. 1, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1997], p. 447

    51.) Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, 30. 22. 1-4

    52.) Origen, Against Celsus, Book 5, Ch. 61

    53.) Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30. 3. 3

    55.) Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, 30.13.7-8

    56.) Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, 30.16.6-9

    57.) Bruce Chilton, Jacob Neusner, The Brother of Jesus: James the Just and his Mission, [Westminster John Knox Press, 2001], p. 37

    58.) John Gager states that the Ebionites “developed a legend to explain Paul’s opposition to the law.” (John Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes Toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity, [Oxford University Press, 1985], p. 187). Bruce Chilton and Jacob Neusner state that, “Epiphanius reports a legend among the Ebionites that Paul accepted circumcision in the first place only to marry the daughter of the high priest. ” (Bruce Chilton, Jacob Neusner, Types of Authority in Formative Christianity and Judaism, [Routledge, 1999], p. 161). A. F. J. Klijn and G. J. Reinink identify this Ebionite charge as a “story.” (F. J. Klijn, G. J., Reinink Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects, Vol. 36, [Brill Archive, 1973], p. 37). In reference to this specific Ebionite charge Harold W. Attridge states: “Another category of legends pertains to stories that characterize various aspects of an apostle’s character…Christians opposed to Paul told the following story…” (Harold W. Attridge, Eusebíus, Christianity, and Judaism, [Wayne State University Press, 1992], p. 173). Commenting on this charge Matthew A. Jackson-McCabe states that, “Epiphanius transmits some new (fictitious) stories that illustrate the Ebionites’ anti-Paulinism. For instance, the Ebionites explained that Paul’s antipathy toward the law and circumcision was caused by his unfortunate love affairs.” (Matthew A. Jackson-McCabe, Jewish Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts, [Fortress Press, 2007], p. 88). Richard N. Longenecker states that this Ebionite charge is one in a “cycle of stories fostered in Ebionite circles of the late second and early third centuries.” (Richard N. Longenecker, The Road from Damascus: The Impact of Paul's Conversion on his Life, Thought, and Ministry, [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1997], p. 4

    61.) Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, trans. Alfred Guillaume, [Oxford University Press], p. 653 bold emphasis ours


    DanTDM on Tour (2016-17)

    In July 2016, Dan announced to his viewers that he was going on a tour of the United Kingdom. Fans expected to see a gaming session similar to his Insomnia shows in Birmingham, UK. Instead, they received a scripted show which included Minecraft, Roblox and many games coded especially for the shows. It was an adventure to save Dan's pugs and welcomed back some characters who had taken absences such as Denton, Trayaurus and Craig. It also welcomed some new faces such as Eve, Evil Dan and Mr. Pig. See the Major Characters page for more info on some of these characters. After the last part of the UK tour, Dan announced that he was taking this show on a world tour. He started in Sydney, Australia, followed by half a year in the United States. It was then followed by a short Australia tour, where his final show took place at the Sydney Opera House.

    DANTDM ON TOUR ANNOUNCEMENT!!

    DanTDM presents The Contest (2019)

    In April 2019, he announced that he was embarking on a world tour once again, starting in four arenas in the United Kingdom (Wembley, Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow). As part of the "interactive experience" that was promised for the tour, an app was released that was used for the shows. The shows were held between June and July of the same year.

    In September 2019, he announced that he would not continue the tour due to his wife's pregnancy, and instead, it was later adapted into a film that was shown in select cinemas in United Kingdom, Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand on 2 and 3 November 2019. Online ticket selling started on 4 October. In a similar fashion to the tour, an app was also released as part of the interactive experience.

    On 12 July 2020, he released the full cinema version of the show to his YouTube channel as part of its first anniversary.


    Contents

    Disneyland

    Originally conceived in the mid-1950s by Walt Disney as a walk-through ghost house, artist Harper Goff was tapped to conceptually design the attraction. The house originally had a rural American design and was intended to be at the end of a crooked path that led away from Disneyland's Main Street, U.S.A.. Eventually, the decision was made to place it in New Orleans Square and thus the mansion's exterior was themed as an antebellum home.

    The attraction went through many concept changes before its facade was completed in 1963, six years before it would open to the public, delayed by Disney's involvement in the 1964 New York World's Fair. At one point, it was conceived as a walk-through that would empty out into an exhibit called "The Museum of the Weird". Conceptual drawings were done for this concept, but the Museum of the Weird would be left on the drawing board due to the walk-through idea being shot down in favor of making the attraction a ride-through.

    In what might be considered to be an odd twist to a supposedly "abandoned" structure, the exterior appears pristine and the surrounding grounds are meticulously maintained. Designers wanted to make the exterior look like a stereotypical run-down and decrepit haunted house, but Walt himself overrode the idea, claiming "we'll take care of the outside and let the ghosts take care of the inside."

    On August 9, 1969, the attraction officially opened to the public and has remained mostly unchanged, with the exception of the yearly conversion into "Haunted Mansion Holiday" discussed below.

    Magic Kingdom

    The Magic Kingdom version was produced in conjunction with the Disneyland one, as they would only open about two years apart from each other. This meant that two of every figure, prop, and scenic element were produced at the same time, the sole exceptions being new Florida exclusive elements such as the Library and Music Room. Because of this, it was the first of the park's attractions to complete construction and installation.

    As New Orleans Square was replaced by Liberty Square in the Magic Kingdom's design plans, the attraction's exterior would take on an entirely different look to match. Intended to evoke Upstate New York and New England horror stories such as The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and the works of Edgar Allen Poe, the attraction took on a "Dutch Gothic" appearance that would more strongly communicate the haunted interior.

    It has had several changes over the years, with various queue enhancements taking place in 2001 and 2011. The largest changes would come in 2007 after a year-long refurbishment called "The Re-Haunting", which would incorporate some of the various incremental changes made at Disneyland in previous years, such as the introduction of a floating Madame Leota and the new attic bride Constance Hatchaway as well as new things like the Endless Staircase and enhanced audio in the Stretching Room. 2011 would also see the replacement of the Hitchhiking Ghosts mirror effect with new computer generated ghosts.

    Sometime in the 90s, Cast Members had created their own history of the house and compiled the stories onto a website known as the Ghost Gallery. Though unofficial, it has had a significant influence on media adaptations such as the 2003 film and Slave Labor Graphics comic series and some of the character names, such as those of the Hitchhiking Ghosts were officially adopted. It is also responsible for the confusion over the Ghost Host and Master Gracey being the same character.

    Tokyo Disneyland

    Early plans for Tokyo Disneyland would have placed the attraction in the middle of Westernland on the shores of the Rivers of America. However, upon seeing the popularity of Big Thunder Mountain Railroad in the American parks, it was decided late in the park's planning to relocate the attraction to Fantasyland and build Big Thunder Mountain Railroad on the spot after the park's opening. Ώ] This new placement in Fantasyland would be justified by the prominent role that ghosts and spirits held in Japanese folktales.

    The mansion itself borrows heavily from the Florida version, albeit with many differences. In addition to a different queue, the mansion itself is more rundown and decrepit, similar to concept art of the original mansion in California. The idea of a decrepit exterior would also be used for the design of Phantom Manor.

    Since 2004, Tokyo Disneyland has hosted the Haunted Mansion Holiday Nightmare overlay for the Halloween and Christmas season, resulting from Magic Kingdom management rejecting an offer for their own Haunted Mansion Holiday overlay.


    Coups in Honduras

    Decades of heavy-handed U.S. intervention in Honduras incited a pervasive, bloody rebellion during the early 1900s.

    America has heard stories that there was a military general on her father&rsquos side and she wants to learn more. She heads to Honduras to her father&rsquos hometown to talk with his best friend, Romaldo.

    Romaldo gives America some much-needed insight about Carlos&rsquo love for her and confirms the story of her military ancestor: her great-grandfather was General Gregorio Ferrera.

    She travels to the National Archives, and although the political instability in Honduras over time has left few records intact, America sees an 1895 census that includes her great-grandfather. He is 14 years old, the presumed son of a farmer and one of 15 siblings. America wonders how someone of such humble means became a general.

    She finds answers with a historian who shows her records for Gregorio—he was enrolled in a school for boys, showing that education was probably important to the family. Next, America sees a national newspaper dated 13 years later. Twenty-seven-year-old Gregorio is said to be leaving an important government job to join a military campaign for the Liberal Party.

    America learns of the political turmoil of the time—Liberals and Nationalists took up arms in a civil war, fighting for power. Tied to this was banana production, and the term &ldquobanana republic&rdquo was inspired by the shady politics and corruption gripping Honduras during the early 20th century. Gregorio seems to be embroiled in the fighting, siding with the Liberal president.

    By 1919, the struggle for power became a full-blown revolution. America is thrilled to discover that her great-grandfather was fighting for the people, on the side of democracy and free elections. Or was he? A 1924 TIME Magazine article shows General Ferrera continually shifting allegiances, and a 1925 article found on Ancestry says he is &ldquonotorious for his political obstinacy&rdquo and was again &ldquoin the field with an insurgent force.&rdquo

    Other documents show that Ferrera&rsquos loyalties continued to shift. After a time exiled from the country, he returns for the &ldquopublic good,&rdquo and not to &ldquoagitate for partisan politics.&rdquo But a confidential 1930 letter to the American State Department shows he is still fueling unrest and has a cadre of arms to support it. America feels that her great-grandfather seems to be torn between his political feelings and his business interests.

    But it's all for naught. A newspaper article shows he died the following year in a skirmish—calling him the &ldquoprincipal enemy of Honduran peace.&rdquo Yet the end of the story is more hopeful. A book written in 1965 includes an interview with a soldier who fought for Ferrera who called the general a hero and a man of the people, fighting for freedom and democracy.

    America feels vindicated and finds a connection to a man who fought for something he believed—something she has done in her own life.


    Watch the video: Σχέσεις με διαφορά ηλικίας