Christians Have Some Nerve

[Aractus]

---

Hey,

After reading various works from Bart Ehrman two names keep cropping up.

One is Celsus and the other Prophyry - The Latter even wrote 15 volumes of refutation of the Christian faith and from other sources the church found him a big threat.

What angers me is that Prophyry seen holes all over the Christians faith and belief structure and their writings yet his work was Destroyed.

Perhaps the reason that Christianity looks so legitimate today is because they managed to use Prophryrys arguments to fix the problems in their fucked up belief then burned his work so no one can see the out right lies the Church added / changed or deleted to make it more consistent.

I find myself so completely angry with the Church and Christians for this Injustice - You can never expect anyone to follow your faith or believe a word of it when in the early foundations of your faith you suppressed any criticizm.

One thing I challenge all Christians on here is one that Prophyry noted!

) Referring to Mark 16:18, Porphyry writes: "In another passage Jesus says: "These signs shall
witness to those who believe: they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. And if they
drink any deadly drug, it will hurt them in no way." Well then: the proper thing to do would be to use
this process as a test for those aspiring to be priests, bishops or church officers. A deadly drug should
be put in front of them and [only] those who survive drinking it should be elevated in the ranks [of
the church].
If there are those who refuse to submit to such a test, they may as well admit that they do not
believe in the things that Jesus said. For if it is a doctrine of [Christian] faith that men can survive
being poisoned or heal the sick at will, then the believer who does not do such things either does not
believe them, or else believes them so feebly that he may as well not believe them." page 50

---

Ehrman hasn't a clue what he's talking about, when it comes to his wild theories on the early church.

Porphyry believed that Daniel was written late, a sceptic's view that's now been well disproven...