(September 19, 2012 at 12:34 pm)Drich Wrote:

(September 19, 2012 at 12:29 pm)festive1 Wrote: But there wasn't a "church" at that point... Christ came first, the Church came a long time later...

Ah, no. Did you even click on the link?
The passage in ephesians was written to the Church at Ephesus, and the passage to the Corthians was written to the Church at Corinth.

Nope, but here's a link to a brief overview of my thoughts on the historical accuracy of the Gospels in particular, but you can extend these views to the rest of the Bible...
http://atheistforums.org/thread-14869.html

Quote:Sorry if i am repeating, but "My Wife" refers to the Bride of Christ or "The Church."

In your rather worthless opinion, Drippy. To add on to an earlier observation if a similar sized piece of text were found that said, "and jesus squatted by the side of the road to Capernaum and took his morning dump....." you'd be jumping up and down screeching that " only a real live man can take a morning shit. WE have PROOF!!!"

(September 19, 2012 at 12:38 pm)festive1 Wrote:

(September 19, 2012 at 12:34 pm)Drich Wrote: Ah, no. Did you even click on the link?
The passage in ephesians was written to the Church at Ephesus, and the passage to the Corthians was written to the Church at Corinth.

Nope, but here's a link to a brief overview of my thoughts on the historical accuracy of the Gospels in particular, but you can extend these views to the rest of the Bible...
http://atheistforums.org/thread-14869.html

The establishment of the church is not an a matter of gospel record. It is well known that the Church got is start about 50 days after the death of Christ. Or on the day of Pentecost.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecost

LOL< "It is a well known fairy tale that"............You have a festival made to coincide with another festival...that doesn't make history Drich, nor does it put anything into the status of "well known"... "Well believed", "well repeated", "well celebrated", sure, "well known"...no, not even close.

(September 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm)Rhythm Wrote: LOL< "It is a well known fairy tale that"............You have a festival made to coincide with another festival...that doesn't make history Drich, nor does it put anything into the status of "well known"... "Well believed", "well repeated", sure, "well known"...no, not even close.

Then please Rhythm, So me some body of work (that contains evidence and a legitmate claim) that disputes the start date of the church. (not being on the day of Pentecost after the death of Christ. If it is as you claim then there should be plenty of material for you to site. I did a few google searches and found nothing, but maybe you see something i do not.

That's your baby, your fairy tales don't become true by default. Clearly this hasn't sunken in yet but I'll keep reminding you until it does.

(If you google something and find -only- the fairy tales..that should be a canary in the mines moment. Care to find me a single body of work - that contains evidence and a legitimate claim- disputing the date of the Cattle Raid of Cooley?)

This whole "prove that it didn't" shit is bandied about far too often. Look, if you can't demonstrate the veracity of your myth-as-history claim that's not my problem, but it is yours: anything that follows from this is always going to fall on the same axe. I didn't set you up for this, it isn't any fault of mine that you are unprepared, unwilling, or unable to demonstrate that your working from anything other than bare assertions. Asking me to prove or demonstrate some aspect of your own garbage is asinine. Do your own work, or don't, just know that I enjoy opportunities to publicly remind you that you haven't.

I want to ask you something in earnest, and I hope to get an earnest reply on this. Presumably you are here to provide some sort of clarity on the subject of christianity (and presumably because you feel that atheists just don't have the correct picture of it), but how can you provide any clarity when you either don't possess that clarity, or are unable to pass it along (for whatever reason)? "It's twuuu, it's twuuu, it's twuuu" is not an explanation, it is not a clarification. Now, obviously, you don't -have- to be able to provide this, but considering your constant claims as to why you are here perhaps it would be wise to live up to your own expectations for yourself (or consider that you may not be here for the reasons that you claim in the first place)?

(September 19, 2012 at 3:08 pm)Rhythm Wrote: That's your baby, your fairy tales don't become true by default. Clearly this hasn't sunken in yet but I'll keep reminding you until it does.

(If you google something and find -only- the fairy tales..that should be a canary in the mines moment. Care to find me a single body of work - that contains evidence and a legitimate claim- disputing the date of the Cattle Raid of Cooley?)

Cattle Raid of Cooley.....lol.....gotta write that one down.....that's good stuff

Quote:The passage in ephesians was written to the Church at Ephesus,

As a matter of fact, Drippy, that's bullshit too.

Quote:Most English translations indicate that the addressees are 'the saints who are in Ephesus' (1:1), but the words 'in Ephesus' are not found in the earliest and best Greek manuscripts of this letter. Most textual experts think that the words were not in the letter originally but were added by a scribe after it had already been in circulation for a time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephesians

Don't you ever get tired of being conned by these bullshit artists?

(September 19, 2012 at 4:32 am)Forsaken Wrote:

(September 18, 2012 at 5:05 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: I know people are going to object to this finding but for the life of me I can't really figure out why.

And if a single fragment of something was ever found supposedly supporting the existence of christ, they would all be jumping around proclaiming victory!

We have contemporary references of Apollonius of Tyana and that is just enough to establish his historicity*. Essentially these references say "I met this Apollonius guy and wasn't a bad fellow".

So anything similar attesting to Jesus of Nazareth would be enough to establish his historicity. Therefore this recently discovered fragment written at least a century after Jesus supposedly lived, does not convince me beyond a shadow a doubt that Jesus of Nazareth existed.

*We do also have letters written by Apollonius that seem to be not forgeries.

I just want to see one document, one anything, that mentions jesus in the time he was living, or within 5 years... shiiuut, a century after his alleged death. Until then, he's a made up character in a pretty shitty book.