RE: Christians - What would you do if it were discovered Jesus never existed?
September 5, 2015 at 10:30 am
(September 5, 2015 at 12:51 am)dyresand Wrote:(September 4, 2015 at 11:31 pm)Drich Wrote: I see a lot of empty and unsupported assertions concerning Christ and the historical paper trail surrounding him. Do you have anything to go on besides your word? You by not providing any citations or any other proof of any kinda means, that because you have access to anti Christian commentary we are supposed to simply take you at your 'expert' word. Maybe this is how it works where you are from, but for those who genuinely think for themselves you need to be able to provide some primary or secondary source material to support those otherwise empty words.
Well lets see the historical evidence for a jesus figure really doesn't add up. The only time the jesus myth started to pop up was due to the council of Nicea. That being said Constantine had to create a religion for everyone to follow. This is the birth of christianity various myths compiled into one book I.E. the bible. And it worked because obvious you believe in said person existed. And if you had noticed look at the myths and christianity match up google Apollonius of Tayna even Krishna. Take a good look at Krishna because yahew the god you believe in is so heavily inspired by Krishna its not even funny. christianity really is modeled after the India's belief religion its not funny. The composite jesus the original jesus went to west india and had a family and bore a child through Mary Magdalene. That being said that jesus story was not very liked by the roman catholic church at all and was nearly destroyed but the jesus you believe in is different that one died the original lived. This is speaking from history christianity not original at all it is carbon copied except for jesus.
ah.. no.
the commentary you plagerized is wrong sandy.
In the post you referenced I asked for source material from the person I was talking to. Do you not understand what this means? Maybe for someone like you (someone who lets other decide and think for them) more commentary is 'source material'. Because that is the primary source in which you get your information.
When I however ask for source material I want proof that their is or isn't anything available in this case before the nicea council. Like for instance you would start with when that council came to gether and provide supporting information like for example"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
The above link shows when the council met in 325 AD
So then the question becomes are their any extra biblical records before this Council? The answer like it or not is Yes. Below is a link to a list with links to the actual transcribed works:
http://www.rationalchristianity.net/jesu...l#josephus
You see sandy when you take ALL of your information from commentaries, and not actual source material you are literally letting someone tell you/program you on how and what to think on a given topic. I know you LOVE youtube and think it is akin to the library of Congress with 'truth against God.' But in reality at best you are selling control of your mind to the person who can 'tickle your ears' just right, and has the best production value.
Do you see how what I did works, and what you did failed?? I provided links to actual historical texts that show your plagerized commentary to be at best inaccurate. Does truth not concern you? if it is at all important then why not seek it? why waist your time with all the crap commentaries you are constantly referencing?
