MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[Minimalist]

"Paul" seems as legendary as fucking jesus. Xtians desperately assert that "Clement of Rome" - another phony literary character - wrote an epistle that they date to the persecution of Domitian. Trouble is, there was no persecution of Domitian. Decius, 250 AD, was the first Roman emperor to persecute xtians and he didn't even single them out. That epistle is so important because it is the only first century reference to "Peter" or "Paul" but the fact is that like the rest of the nonsense it comes from the second century.

So much of the story cannot withstand scrutiny.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/persecutions.html

Humphreys from Jesus Never Existed?

Please don't tell me that's how you conclude that Jesus was a Myth? Almost every position he holds is an argument from silence.

Not once does he provide a single stitch of tangible evidence to support his assertions.

All he says is stuff such as, "This guy said nothing, that guy said nothing, this place never existed, yada yada yada."

You will need someone far more credible than him, because seriously, he's laughed at and scorned in the scholarly community.

You know, the fact of the matter is that you will shit on any author who disputes what you believe because....simply....people like you are inherently intellectually dishonest. Facts mean nothing to you.

Well lad, I can't find a citation from a webstie called Isuckedjesus'cock.com because those are committed to upholding your point of view. You believe in a scattered selection of your own bullshit and there is nothing that anyone can say which will dissuade you.

Again, people like the prof and some of the other fundies we have around here are jackasses but they are more honest than you. They do not attempt to whittle down their bullshit to something more politically correct in the 21st century.

You are a phony.

P.S. when you can come up with evidence that Humphreys is wrong, get back to us.