Did you know that Irenaeus thought Jesus was 50 years old when he was crucified? ::gasp::

4. Being thirty years old when He came to be baptized, and then possessing the full age of a Master,145 He came to Jerusalem, so that He might be properly acknowledged146 by all as a Master. For He did not seem one thing while He was another, as those affirm who describe Him as being man only in appearance; but what He was, that He also appeared to be. Being a Master, therefore, He also possessed the age of a Master, not despising or evading any condition of humanity, nor setting aside in Himself that law which He had147 appointed for the human race, but sanctifying every age, by that period corresponding to it which belonged to Himself. For He came to save all through means of Himself-all, I say, who through Him are born again to God148 -infants,149 and children, and boys, and youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety, righteousness, and submission; a youth for youths, becoming an example to youths, and thus sanctifying them for the Lord. So likewise He was an old man for old men, that He might be a perfect Master for all, not merely as respects the setting forth of the truth, but also as regards age, sanctifying at the same time the aged also, and becoming an example to them likewise. Then, at last, He came on to death itself, that He might be "the first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence,"150 the Prince of life,151 existing before all, and going before all.152

5. They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written, "to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord," maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful to their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable than any other; that more advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher He excelled all others. For how could He have had disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: "Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,"153 when He came to receive baptism); and, [according to these men, ] He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years,154 and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth andfiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information.155 And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan.156 Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these, or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?

6. But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed with the Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated the same thing. For when the Lord said to them, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad," they answered Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham? "157 Now, such language is fittingly applied to one who has already passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached his fiftieth year, yet is not far from this latter period. But to one who is only thirty years old it would unquestionably be said, "Thou art not yet forty years old." For those who wished to convict Him of falsehood would certainly not extend the number of His years far beyond the age which they saw He had attained; but they mentioned a period near His real age, whether they had truly ascertained this out of the entry in the public register, or simply made a conjecture from what they observed that He was above forty years old, and that He certainly was not one of only thirty years of age.For it is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were mistaken by twenty years, when they wished to prove Him younger than the times of Abraham. For what they saw, that they also expressed; and He whom they beheld was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being158 of flesh and blood. He did not then wont much of being fifty years old;159 and, in accordance with that fact, they said to Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham? "He did not therefore preach only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year. For the period included between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year, unless indeed, among their Aeons, there be so long years assigned to those who sit in their ranks with Bythus in the Pleroma; of which beings Homer the poet, too, has spoken, doubtless being inspired by the Mother of their [system of] error:-

Oi9 de\ qeoi\ pu\ r Zeni\ kaqh=menoi h0goro/wnto

Xruse/w| e0n dape/dw|:160

which we may thus render into English:161 -"The gods sat round, while Jove presided o'er, And converse held upon the golden floor."

-Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2:22:4-6

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), January 02, 2004

Answers

Was he? hmmmmm............................................................... ................................... Well the Bible says No!

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), January 02, 2004.

Ireneaeus had a major hand in bringing down Gnosticism.

...........................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), January 02, 2004.

David, I believe why Irenaus thought Jesus was 50 years. Let's look at the context of this passage: Jhn 8:20 These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come. ....... Jhn 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jesus was at the temple. See that similar passage is listed at Mark 12 about the treasury in the temple: Mar 12:41 And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.

Mar 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings [are here]! While Jesus was there someone asked about the temple, jesus said: Mar 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

See same passage also in John, but out of place. John 2 should follow John 8. Jhn 2:18 Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Jhn 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? Jhn 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

46 years in building the Temple, but Jesus was talking of his body. This created the confusion that Jesus was 46 years old!!!

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), January 15, 2004.

Hey, Rod,

Gnostic means there is a hidden knowledge.

This means some sections of our present accepted Gospels could also pass as Gnostic. Examples: Mat 6:4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly Mat 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: Mat 10:26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known. Mat 10:27 What I tell you in darkness, [that] speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, [that] preach ye upon the housetops. Mat 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. Mat 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

The long discourses in the Gospel of John sound Gnostic. Examples the bread of Life, the vine,...

Why, because Jesus used parables. They were used to instruct among Jewish teachers and prophets. Parables were used for example by the prophet Nathan to scold David for taking someone else's wife.

John doesn't have parables.

Revelation also is Gnostic. It was rejected by half of Church fathers prior to AD 300.

Examples: only single people will be with Jesus after the resurrection and no man could learn that song but the hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. Rev 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, [being] the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

Imagine, Rod.

Married men like you and me will not see Jesus if Revelation is to be believed!!!! We are no longer virgins because we were with women already!!!

-- Elpidio gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), January 15, 2004.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!!

How Old is Jesus According to St. Irenaeus?

Mr. James White says ...

Such a challenge reminds me of this wonderful passage in Irenaeus, Ad Her. II:22:5:

"For how could He have had disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old, when He came to receive baptism); and, [according to these men,] He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information. And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these, or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?"

Here Irenaeus claims an *apostolic tradition*, barely a century after the ministry of the apostles (and less, in the case of John), that claims that Jesus was more than 50 years of age at His death.

:-) Well, you're proving that you are not infallible more and more, Mr. White. Not only do you read the Scriptures incorrectly because you wrench them out of context, you also do the same with the Fathers. Why didn't you present ALL of what St. Irenaeus has to say? Then you might understand his point IN CONTEXT.

First of all, Irenaeus' point is that Jesus' humanity identifies with human beings of every age:

"For He came to save all through means of Himself--all, I say, who through Him are born again to God --infants, and children, and boys, and ***youths***, and ***old men***. He therefore passed through ***every age***, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety, righteousness, and submission; a youth for youths, becoming an example to youths, and thus sanctifying them for the Lord. ****So likewise He was an old man for old men****, that He might be a perfect Master for all, not merely as respects the setting forth of the truth, but also as regards age, sanctifying at the same time ***the aged*** also, and becoming an example to them likewise."

So, is Irenaeus saying that Jesus became an "old man"???? :-) Nope. But, first he continues...

"They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written, 'to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,' maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful to their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and ****robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable**** .... "Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be ****thirty years old****, when He came to receive baptism; and, [according to these men,] He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His ***thirtieth year*** He suffered, being in fact still a ***young man***, and who had by no means attained to ***advanced age***."

So far, Irenaeus' point is that some say that Jesus died at age 30 (as a "young man," as opposed to an "elder"), that He was NO OLDER than 30. And, he continues...

"Now, that the ***first stage of early life*** embraces ***thirty years*** (i.e. age 1 to age 30), and that this extends onwards to the ***fortieth year*** (31-40), every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth (i.e. 40 plus) year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, ***even as the Gospel*** and all the elders ***testify*** ..."

Ah! :-) Now what is Irenaeus' point???? It's that Jesus was OLDER than 30 when He died (i.e. 33 years old, to be precise --"EVEN AS THE GOSPEL ...TESTIFIES" ...that is, the Gospel of John ;-). His point is that Jesus lived past the first stage of life, and was in the stage of life between 31 and 50, which extends into "old age" (as they saw it in Roman times). In this, Jesus was qualified to be a teacher; since a Jewish rabbi had to be a "elder" in order to be a true teacher.

Think about it. Irenaeus says that the Gospel TESTIFIES to this. Does the Gospel ever say that Jesus was 40 or 50??? Of course not! Rather, John's Gospel presents Jesus as thirty years old at the time of His Baptism, and then gives a 3-year narrative. And THAT is Irenaeus' point.

And, Irenaeus continues,

"But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed with the Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated the same thing. For when the Lord said to them, 'Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad,' they answered Him, 'Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?' Now, such language is fittingly applied to one who has already passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached his fiftieth year, yet is not far from this latter period. But to ****one who is only thirty years old**** it would unquestionably be said, 'Thou art not yet forty years old.' "

:-) Notice how Irenaeus is counting in 10's here. :-) Jesus is 33, so the Jews do not use "forty," but "fifty." Why? Because the Jews would only say "forty" if Jesus was 30-years-old or younger. Yet, he had entered into the next stage of life -- the period between 31 and 50, as opposed to the period between 13 and 30.

And Irenaeus then sums up his point, saying:

"He did not therefore preach ***only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year.*** For the period included between the ***thirtieth and the fiftieth year*** can never be regarded as one year ...."

So, Irenaeus' point is that Jesus was between 30 and 50. That is all he is saying. He is showing that Jesus had reached the age of a Teacher: 33 yrs-old, according to the Gospel of John.

So, you misinterpret Irenaeus, Mr. White, BECAUSE you did not read his statement IN CONTEXT, and because you did not read it with the cultural sensibilities of a 2nd century Greco-Roman Christian, but with your own, narrow, modernist sensibilities. For a scholar, that is DISGRACEFUL!

Mark J. Bonocore, www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a38.htm

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 26, 2004.