Oh, trust me, I do know full well the can of worms that is opened up by the claim that 1Cor 15 was written "within 5 years of Jesus' death" and that it proves the existence of a creed and what that creed was. When I can do it justice, it will include a full discussion on:
1. When was the death of Jesus again? We'll have to take the Gospels seriously enough to try to pinpoint that date on a timeline which we'd have to do if we're seriously going to assert a narrow five year window.
2. What did the early Christians believe again, taking in full consideration that there was no orthodox belief about Jesus.
3. A full verse-by-verse reading of 1 Cor 15 to show what a truckload of crap it is and even if we do take it seriously, it actually undermines the Historist's case.
4. And who was Paul again? There's a can of worms in and of itself. He was originally discovered by Marcion as the poster child of his denomination of Christianity. Half his epistles are considered "inauthentic". He received a complete rewrite by the triumphant Orthodox Christians as evident by the stark contrast between Acts and his epistles. And taking him seriously enough to consider that he was a historical character and that he actually wrote what we have, he was apparently a schizophrenic who had hallucinations and heard voices.
For right now, I'll just say that anyone who holds up the Bible and says "historical documents" should just be laughed out of the room.
1. When was the death of Jesus again? We'll have to take the Gospels seriously enough to try to pinpoint that date on a timeline which we'd have to do if we're seriously going to assert a narrow five year window.
2. What did the early Christians believe again, taking in full consideration that there was no orthodox belief about Jesus.
3. A full verse-by-verse reading of 1 Cor 15 to show what a truckload of crap it is and even if we do take it seriously, it actually undermines the Historist's case.
4. And who was Paul again? There's a can of worms in and of itself. He was originally discovered by Marcion as the poster child of his denomination of Christianity. Half his epistles are considered "inauthentic". He received a complete rewrite by the triumphant Orthodox Christians as evident by the stark contrast between Acts and his epistles. And taking him seriously enough to consider that he was a historical character and that he actually wrote what we have, he was apparently a schizophrenic who had hallucinations and heard voices.
For right now, I'll just say that anyone who holds up the Bible and says "historical documents" should just be laughed out of the room.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
