Mrs. Christ

[Cinjin]

Let the shrieking commence!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/his...TE&ei=5043


At least in this tradition you don't have to worry about your godboy being gay.

Sorry if i am repeating, but "My Wife" refers to the Bride of Christ or "The Church."

http://www.gotquestions.org/bride-of-Christ.html

So awesome. the apologist is engrained in this one. See my remark below Min's post for the wrap up.

In your rather worthless opinion, Drippy. To add on to an earlier observation if a similar sized piece of text were found that said, "and jesus squatted by the side of the road to Capernaum and took his morning dump....." you'd be jumping up and down screeching that " only a real live man can take a morning shit. WE have PROOF!!!"

If the world discovered a perfectly preserved NOTEBOOK, authenticated to be from the 1st century, in jesus's tomb, with notaries from a half dozen well-known historians of the day, and jesus's very own signature clear as day on the bottom - it wouldn't matter if jesus wrote the words: "I was fucking my wife and her hot sisters in the smudge hole when Peter and John caught me in the act."

They've got apologetic excuses down to (no not an art form) a joke form. They'd have something cooked up so fast, that fucking "was actually praying" and hot sisters "are just sisters fervent in their beliefs," and the meanings and definitions have been mistranslated, and blah blah blah. I mean seriously, Drich and his fellow christards have turned their religion into such a damn joke. There's nothing you can EVER present them that they can't gymnasty their way out of ... and at the drop of a hat.




Such a stupid stupid religion.

[Polaris]

I used to believe in this getting caught up with that stupid Dan Brown BS, but the evidence was just not there.

[Godscreated]

It amazing to me how so many here will state that the NT is not accurate because the books of the NT were written 50 years after the resurrection. Then make such a big deal out of small pieces that was written nearly 300 years later and with no connection to any other writings. You have double standards, and you wonder why we (christians) do not trust anything you say.
Drich is right saying that the word probably should have been translated bride, referring to the church, and the bride (church) would be His disciple. This would fit very nicely with the NT writings.

[Cyberman]

It amazing to me how so many here will state that the NT is not accurate because the books of the NT were written 50 years after the resurrection. Then make such a big deal out of small pieces that was written nearly 300 years later and with no connection to any other writings. You have double standards, and you wonder why we (christians) do not trust anything you say.

You can only make such statements by ignoring things like this:

Therefore this recently discovered fragment written at least a century after Jesus supposedly lived, does not convince me beyond a shadow a doubt that Jesus of Nazareth existed.

---

Drich is right saying that the word probably should have been translated bride, referring to the church, and the bride (church) would be His disciple. This would fit very nicely with the NT writings.

Come on, you can do much better than that. If you really tried, I know you could rationalise the whole document fragment away altogether. You're letting me down.

[Godscreated]

It amazing to me how so many here will state that the NT is not accurate because the books of the NT were written 50 years after the resurrection. Then make such a big deal out of small pieces that was written nearly 300 years later and with no connection to any other writings. You have double standards, and you wonder why we (christians) do not trust anything you say.

You can only make such statements by ignoring things like this:

Therefore this recently discovered fragment written at least a century after Jesus supposedly lived, does not convince me beyond a shadow a doubt that Jesus of Nazareth existed.

---

Drich is right saying that the word probably should have been translated bride, referring to the church, and the bride (church) would be His disciple. This would fit very nicely with the NT writings.

Come on, you can do much better than that. If you really tried, I know you could rationalise the whole document fragment away altogether. You're letting me down.

Why, it exist and it is not connected to any writings, for all anyone knows it was just a thought jotted down and nothing more.

About the first part of your reply, I did not say all, deceiver you are.

[Cyberman]

What are you, Yoda now? Regardless, I didn't say all either, nor accuse you of saying it. Deceiver you are. It's naughty to bear false witness, you know.

[Minimalist]

It amazing to me how so many here will state that the NT is not accurate because the books of the NT were written 50 years after the resurrection.

Get your head out of your ass, G-C. There was no fucking resurrection.

It's all fairy tales to impress morons like you.

[Forsaken]

It amazing to me how so many here will state that the NT is not accurate because the books of the NT were written 50 years after the resurrection. Then make such a big deal out of small pieces that was written nearly 300 years later and with no connection to any other writings. You have double standards, and you wonder why we (christians) do not trust anything you say.
Drich is right saying that the word probably should have been translated bride, referring to the church, and the bride (church) would be His disciple. This would fit very nicely with the NT writings.

Newsflash! We don't believe your godboy existed, so none of your statements make any sense. Finding a piece of scrap with someone's personal note does not automatically qualify as a proof of your imaginary friend's existence. We discuss it here just because your silly fables became even more sillier by this discovery.

[festive1]

Why, it exist and it is not connected to any writings, for all anyone knows it was just a thought jotted down and nothing more.

Do you understand that people didn't just "jot" things down at the time this papyrus was written on?? So few people were literate and paper and ink were very costly they could only be obtained by the exceedingly wealthy. SO much facepalm...

[Minimalist]

Just to piss G-C and the rest of the morons off even more, here is an excerpt from Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities." Prior to the thuggish emperor Constantine handing power to what Ehrman calls the "proto-orthodox" gang there were xtians of all stripes throughout (mainly) the eastern empire.

The Varieties of Ancient Christianity

The wide diversity of early Christianity may be seen above all in the theological beliefs embraced by people who understood themselves to be followers of Jesus. In the second and third centuries there were, of course, Christians who believed in one God. But there were others who insisted that there were two. Some said there were thirty. Others claimed there were 365. In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that God had created the world. But others believed that this world had been created by a subordinate, ignorant divinity. (Why else would the world be filled with such misery and hardship?) Yet other Christians thought it was worse than that, that this world was a cosmic mistake created by a malevolent divinity as a place of imprisonment, to trap humans and subject them to pain and suffering.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that the Jewish Scripture (the Christian “Old Testament”) was inspired by the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by the God of the Jews, who was not the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by an evil deity. Others believed it was not inspired.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus was both divine and human, God and man. There were other Christians who argued that he was completely divine and not human at all. (For them, divinity and humanity were incommensurate entities: God can no more be a man than a man can be a rock.) There were others who insisted that Jesus was a full flesh-and-blood human, adopted by God to be his son but not himself divine. There were yet other Christians who claimed that Jesus Christ was two things: a full flesh-and-blood human, Jesus, and a fully divine being, Christ, who had temporarily inhabited Jesus’ body during his ministry and left him prior to his death, inspiring his teachings and miracles but avoiding the suffering in its aftermath.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus’ death brought about the salvation of the world. There were other Christians who thought that Jesus’ death had nothing to do with the salvation of the world. There were yet other Christians who said that Jesus never died.

Now I fully expect the lunatic fringe of this board to shout that all of this was mere heresy but Ehrman's point is that there was no power which could enforce the charge. Rival gangs of rioting xtians probably did fight it out from time to time....emulating modern muslims...and no doubt attracting the wrath of the local urban prefect who wouldn't have given two shits about their silly superstitions and cracked a few heads in the process of riot control. It was not until Constantine gave the proto-orthodox the power of the state to suppress "heresy" that the basic order of xtian bullshit that we know today was finally allowed to establish itself - and woe to anyone who said "hey, wait a minute".... in the 4th century.