he lived by escaping to the himalayas in india where he lived upto 53 years. what is the official version from the vatican or jesuit fathers?
2006-08-25 06:06:39 · 9 answers · asked by superb240405 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
He did not write that Jesus did not die on the cross. He wrote that Jesus lived longer than people thought he did, but that he was crucified.
What Irenaeus believed was that God's incarnation as Jesus is what brought about our salvation. That is, he said that Jesus' atonement for our sins happened through his incarnation, not his crucifixion. Irenaeus does not dispute the crucifixion, and in fact says that the crucifixion is an integral part of the incarnation. His theological premise is that crucifixion was not "essential" for salvation. What was essential was God becoming flesh.
2006-08-25 06:27:33 · answer #1 · answered by Gestalt 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The vatican follows the bible, meaning that according to the bible Jesus died on the cross, therefore that's the official version from the vatican.
2006-08-25 06:20:19 · answer #2 · answered by Jen H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Really? Well who should we believe? The people like Peter and John and Paul and Luke who lived and saw Jesus and know what happened because they were there at the time He died, or the theory of someone who came along some time later?
2006-08-25 10:58:21 · answer #3 · answered by Martin S 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
St. Ienaeus of Lyon didn't write the Bible. This is another part of Islamic teachings. Islam believes that Judas died on the cross instead of Jesus. They say Judas looked so much like Jesus that he was mistakenly crucified in his place. And Jesus got away.
Just another attempt to discredit the Bible. I'm looking forward to the day I can look down and say......Told Ya So.
2006-08-25 06:16:40 · answer #4 · answered by Cal 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"...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..."
2006-08-25 06:26:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Was St. Ienaeus a Gnostic Christian? I'm pretty sure they believed his 'likeness' was crucified instead of him & I have the impression that some of their writings have Hinduistic philosophy. But, I really don't know who you're talking about...I have a tattoo of a lion so 'of Lyon' caught my attention ;-)
2006-08-25 06:19:16 · answer #6 · answered by strpenta 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
St Ienaeus will pay dearly for his blaspheming of the Holy Spirit.
2006-08-25 06:14:21 · answer #7 · answered by Preacher 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who?
2006-08-25 06:09:55 · answer #8 · answered by ReliableLogic 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So this makes it true, right? HAH!!!!!!!!!!
2006-08-25 06:31:09 · answer #9 · answered by stullerrl 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋