[quote='Minimalist' pid='353039' dateline='1351015213']
[quote]all of these "points" just to mask the fact that you have an incomplete Written Roman Record (say that 5 times fast.) and that you are simly argueing from a position of faith...[/quote]
[quote]No, dummy. We are not ignoring it at all. You are trying to bake a cake on a monkey's ass [/quote]
what does that even mean?
[quote]by suggesting that all of the documents which did talk about your godboy were destroyed. This is absurd because it was xtians who largely determined which documents were copied and also xtians who did the destruction of ancient literature because it did not support their fucking religion.[/quote]lol.. still laughing..
The great 'book burnings' were centuries after the fact. Rome simply did not keep/store records for the sake of posterity. It was a big deal to store written documents. They built scriptoriums for these documents. The majority of what was written was written on papyrus (A paper like material made from reeds.) This had a self life of maybe twenty years in normal care, they may have been able to double that if with in the scriptorium the document/scroll was placed in a micro enviorment like a seal jar. Great lengths had to be taken to make a document made from papyrus last any length of time. as Too much or too little mositure would destroy this material. Plus it was extremely fragile even when new. That is why all formal documents and declerations were recorded on parchement and vellum. (sheep of calf skin) Day to Day reports or even the records for large regional events (like the dead walking) would have still been recorded on papryus, for the simply reason of cost.
So (using my head for something other than a hat rack) If the vast majority of the written works of 1st century rome was destroyed due to the fact that they were recorded on material not meant to generally last more than a few decades, and if the majority day to day affairs of 1st century rome was recorded on this material. then it is logical to say that the majority of 1st century record of the day to day has been lost long before any of the book burnings began.
Now take these undisputable facts and hold it next to your claim that Rome did not record anything of Christ. With the vast majority of what 1st century Rome recorded being lost to the ages, it is not factualy correct to make this claim. You can claim this, but understand your claim is not supported by the facts. Which makes your claim a statement of Faith. Which is fine, but you do have to acknoweledge it as a statement of faith and not a fact based arguement.
[quote]all of these "points" just to mask the fact that you have an incomplete Written Roman Record (say that 5 times fast.) and that you are simly argueing from a position of faith...[/quote]
[quote]No, dummy. We are not ignoring it at all. You are trying to bake a cake on a monkey's ass [/quote]
what does that even mean?[quote]by suggesting that all of the documents which did talk about your godboy were destroyed. This is absurd because it was xtians who largely determined which documents were copied and also xtians who did the destruction of ancient literature because it did not support their fucking religion.[/quote]lol.. still laughing..
The great 'book burnings' were centuries after the fact. Rome simply did not keep/store records for the sake of posterity. It was a big deal to store written documents. They built scriptoriums for these documents. The majority of what was written was written on papyrus (A paper like material made from reeds.) This had a self life of maybe twenty years in normal care, they may have been able to double that if with in the scriptorium the document/scroll was placed in a micro enviorment like a seal jar. Great lengths had to be taken to make a document made from papyrus last any length of time. as Too much or too little mositure would destroy this material. Plus it was extremely fragile even when new. That is why all formal documents and declerations were recorded on parchement and vellum. (sheep of calf skin) Day to Day reports or even the records for large regional events (like the dead walking) would have still been recorded on papryus, for the simply reason of cost.
So (using my head for something other than a hat rack) If the vast majority of the written works of 1st century rome was destroyed due to the fact that they were recorded on material not meant to generally last more than a few decades, and if the majority day to day affairs of 1st century rome was recorded on this material. then it is logical to say that the majority of 1st century record of the day to day has been lost long before any of the book burnings began.
Now take these undisputable facts and hold it next to your claim that Rome did not record anything of Christ. With the vast majority of what 1st century Rome recorded being lost to the ages, it is not factualy correct to make this claim. You can claim this, but understand your claim is not supported by the facts. Which makes your claim a statement of Faith. Which is fine, but you do have to acknoweledge it as a statement of faith and not a fact based arguement.
