The whole Nero thing is another example of the classic xtian paradox, Cerrone.

On the one hand they expect everyone to believe that their boy was so important and so disruptive and had so many followers that the sanheddrin had no choice but to break every fucking rule in their own book and hold a "trial" on passover because they could not wait another day to deal with this problem and YET, he was so insignificant that no one made the slightest reference to him.

Likewise, they blithely assume that with their boy dying no later Spring 36 AD and the Great Fire of 64 AD happening a mere 28 years later that there were somehow "multitudes" of xtians in fucking Rome itself and YET, in spite of this apparent enormous expansion of xtian numbers not a single Greco-Roman or Jewish writer makes the slightest reference to them until the second century when Pliny the Younger writes that he questioned a group of them in Asia Minor.


I swear, sometimes I think that they think everyone is as credulous as they!

(October 14, 2010 at 1:49 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The whole Nero thing is another example of the classic xtian paradox, Cerrone.

On the one hand they expect everyone to believe that their boy was so important and so disruptive and had so many followers that the sanheddrin had no choice but to break every fucking rule in their own book and hold a "trial" on passover because they could not wait another day to deal with this problem and YET, he was so insignificant that no one made the slightest reference to him.

Likewise, they blithely assume that with their boy dying no later Spring 36 AD and the Great Fire of 64 AD happening a mere 28 years later that there were somehow "multitudes" of xtians in fucking Rome itself and YET, in spite of this apparent enormous expansion of xtian numbers not a single Greco-Roman or Jewish writer makes the slightest reference to them until the second century when Pliny the Younger writes that he questioned a group of them in Asia Minor.


I swear, sometimes I think that they think everyone is as credulous as they!

There's also a reference in Tacitus' Annals, about a Christus, which Christians make plenty of noise with. If you tell them that Tacitus is reporting what he just knew from contempary Christians, they go crazy on you. I've had the experience on certain xtian forums.

Quote:Where exactly is the logic in genesis????

Only the first verse

Quote:The keyword, my little christian souljaboy, was PERHAPS. But wait a minute, if I have an idea, and you have a bible, does that mean you don't actually exist at all?

My username solja247, stands for my old youth group:
Showing
Our
Lord
Jesus
Atitude

I dont get your last part? How does that prove I dont exist?

Quote:I wasn't addressing christians in that post, for the time being I have too much pity for you guys to subject you to my standards of intelligent conversation.

btw how old are you? You type and think like a 12yr old... just saying...

I remember when I was a teenager and I thought I was more intelligent than everyone. I do make some mistakes, I usually get on here when its really late, thus I am extremely tired and do make some mistakes, just saying...But Jesus still loves you.

Quote:The evidence ( a word you must fucking hate, Sol) indicates that the story of Nero slaughtering xtians is a much later interpolation in The Annals of P. Cornelius Tacitus. No ancient writer, including xtian writers, cites the account in any of their works. Further, the bulk of the wording appears (without reference to Tacitus) in Sulpicius Severus' 5th century work "Sacred History" (which is two lies for the price of one!) although without the Pilate reference.

I challenge you to find one credible encyclopedia that states the minority belief that the persecution of Christians by Nero was a fabrication. You seem to always go for the underdog, Jesus still loves you as well.

(October 15, 2010 at 7:36 am)solja247 Wrote:

Quote:Where exactly is the logic in genesis????

Only the first verse

Quote:The keyword, my little christian souljaboy, was PERHAPS. But wait a minute, if I have an idea, and you have a bible, does that mean you don't actually exist at all?

My username solja247, stands for my old youth group:
Showing
Our
Lord
Jesus
Atitude

I dont get your last part? How does that prove I dont exist?

Quote:I wasn't addressing christians in that post, for the time being I have too much pity for you guys to subject you to my standards of intelligent conversation.

btw how old are you? You type and think like a 12yr old... just saying...

I remember when I was a teenager and I thought I was more intelligent than everyone. I do make some mistakes, I usually get on here when its really late, thus I am extremely tired and do make some mistakes, just saying...But Jesus still loves you.

Quote:The evidence ( a word you must fucking hate, Sol) indicates that the story of Nero slaughtering xtians is a much later interpolation in The Annals of P. Cornelius Tacitus. No ancient writer, including xtian writers, cites the account in any of their works. Further, the bulk of the wording appears (without reference to Tacitus) in Sulpicius Severus' 5th century work "Sacred History" (which is two lies for the price of one!) although without the Pilate reference.

I challenge you to find one credible encyclopedia that states the minority belief that the persecution of Christians by Nero was a fabrication. You seem to always go for the underdog, Jesus still loves you as well.

You realize that your "jesus still loves you" is a deliberate attempt on your part to inflame the discussion. Don't be surprise if people start to retaliate with insults, derision and mockery. You will only have earned it.

(October 15, 2010 at 10:58 am)little_monkey Wrote:

(October 15, 2010 at 7:36 am)solja247 Wrote: I remember when I was a teenager and I thought I was more intelligent than everyone. I do make some mistakes, I usually get on here when its really late, thus I am extremely tired and do make some mistakes, just saying...But Jesus still loves you.

You realize that your "jesus still loves you" is a deliberate attempt on your part to inflame the discussion. Don't be surprise if people start to retaliate with insults, derision and mockery. You will only have earned it.

Me first! me first!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp9lTeVXOQ4

Quote:There's also a reference in Tacitus' Annals, about a Christus,

Tacitus is looking more and more like a much later interpolation. Probably not until the 15th century.

See post #17 in this thread.

Quote:Tacitus is looking more and more like a much later interpolation. Probably not until the 15th century.

See post #17 in this thread.

So, you were not able to find any credible encyclopedias saying that the persecution of Christians by Nero is false?

(October 15, 2010 at 6:59 pm)solja247 Wrote:

Quote:Tacitus is looking more and more like a much later interpolation. Probably not until the 15th century.

See post #17 in this thread.

So, you were not able to find any credible encyclopedias saying that the persecution of Christians by Nero is false?

I was supposed to be looking for an encyclopedia for you?

What am I? Your fucking secretary?


Humphreys has listed the known persecutions. Let's see you find some references in early xtian authors which dispute his findings. Good luck.

(October 15, 2010 at 12:32 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:There's also a reference in Tacitus' Annals, about a Christus,

Tacitus is looking more and more like a much later interpolation. Probably not until the 15th century.

See post #17 in this thread.

Thanks, interesting piece of info. Yeah, considering the proliferation of the name Christus, or Chretianos, and other variations of the name, one cannot exclude the possibility that Suetonia or Tacitus might be referring to some other individual than Christ himself.

Here is what I posted on a Christian forum:

We know for a fact that Tacitus was never present at the events surrounding Jesus. So where did he get his information? Did he go to Jerusalem to investigate these events? No record of that. Did he examine any official documents that were produced during the time of the events? No record of that. Did he question people that were alive and present at those events? No record of that. So where could he ever have gotten hold of that information? Could it be from Christians living in his time? Quite possibly, and more than likely than not. And what information would he have gotten from those christians living in his times circa 100 CE? I let you answer this one, Genius.

Here was the response:

Sorry, but repeating the same BS does not magically turn it into a valid argument. Essentially, your argument is an argument from silence, and an argument from ignorance. Of course, when I say your argument, I really mean: the collection of loosely connected inane abject nonsense stitched together with blind faith and die-hard fervour you used in lieu of an actual argument.

Here is a pointer: if Tacitus got his information from Christians... why did he not point out that it was false? Why would a highly critical and notoriously reliable historian uncritcally use their statements as evidence?

Can you get a more stupid answer than that?

Yes, if the Tacitus reference is a fraud then it does become an argument from silence. It means that NO ONE linked Nero with any persecution of xtians. Your religious frauds would much rather rely on a forgery that tells them what they want to hear than seek out facts which might undercut their precious beliefs.


Here is a web site I keep handy which deals with the issue.

http://carrington-arts.com/cliff/Nero.htm

Quote:Tacitus is the only writer to connect the fire with the Christians. Nero was blamed, both at the time and in all other subsequent writers on the fire, and supposedly blamed the Christians for arson. He then condemned “large numbers” of them to be crucified and torched during the night. This must have been a big affair and there must have been “large numbers” of so-called Christians.

In his earlier ‘Histories’ Tacitus has a different attitude. The person in charge of persecutions in Rome was the City Prefect, Police Chief of Rome. Under Nero this was a man described by Tacitus in his ‘Histories’ bk. 3, #65, #75 - “His gentle character made him hate bloodshed and killing... His honesty and fair-mindedness are beyond question.” Flavius Sabinus, brother of Vespasian, was City Prefect of Rome from 56-69, covering the Neronian period of the disputed persecutions! Would a man of this character do the things described in the ‘Annals’ and Sulpicius?

The big question is why the Church Fathers know Nothing of this important information from Tacitus? The two partial manuscripts were found in the Medici library dating from 1313 to 1375. It is only after this time, much after, that the story became almost an Article of Faith about the early Church.

Somewhere along the line, xtian apologists have latched onto the mantra "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." This is, of course, completely false. Absence of evidence is most definitely evidence of absence. It is not PROOF of absence ( a distinction these shitwits have trouble comprehending ) as a future discovery may overturn our current knowledge on a given subject.

Were I to assert that there was a thriving European city on the site of New York 200 years before the Dutch arrived and were someone to dig down to 15th century levels and find nothing it most assuredly would be evidence that my claim was full of shit. There is always the possibility that the Norse or someone were there but until I present positive evidence that my claim is true it must be rejected as false.

Now, Lit_Mon, I grant you this nuanced look at the world is far too complex for your average Talking-Snake believer but that should not stop us from stomping on them when they utter such pointless crap.