For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus

[Confused Ape]

[Minimalist]

You know, the church has had 1600 years to concoct this story and plenty of writers along the way to swear to the lies they tell. You are not going find information disparaging religious horseshit on Isuckedjesuscock.com. It isn't what they do.

Humphreys, unlike the church phonies, lists his sources which include
Maxwell Staniforth, a prolific translator of Early Christian writings among others.

You are dangerously close to the bullshit routine that xtians always pull.

They state that "scholars agree jesus existed" and then when someone says "bullshit" they say "well, REAL scholars agree........"

It quickly becomes the No True Scotsman argument.

[EGross]

Remember, to a desert people a "Sea" is any body of water big enough to hold a boat!

The reality, though, is that, short of getting on a Tardis, the truth about Paul is never going to rear it's ugly head unless we find some sort of "Dear Diary, I suckered them again...", which would be in the Vatican vaults anyhow!

[Confused Ape]

[Confused Ape]

It wouldn't let me do another edit to my post so I'm having to write another one.

Kenneth Humphreys says this in his list of sources -

Maxwell Staniforth, Early Christian Writings (Penguin, 1978)

We have to assume that he really means Early Christian Writings:The Apostolic Fathers because that's the only title available anywhere.

According to the Penguin Books information on the amazon 'search book', the original publication by Maxwell Staniforth alone was 1968 (not 1978) and it was reprinted with new editorial material by Andrew Louth in 1987. Further information about this edition says Revised translation. Introductions and new editorial material by Andrew Louth.

I finally managed to find the 1968 version in the Google Play books but the search function is very limited and only shows a few lines at a time if it decides to recognise a word. After a lot of fiddling around I managed to get enough samples to gather (as best I could) that Staniforth was very certain that the text is AD 96 while Louth edited his original introduction to indicate that the allusions to the 'recent misfortunes' could be about Domitian's persecutions. The bit about Flavius Clemens appears to have been pruned down a bit because Louth mightn't have thought it worth mentioning Flavius's relatives when it was unlikely that he was Bishop Clement.

Aaaaarrrgggghhh!!!! Anyway, if you want a copy of the book Humphreys used as a reference you can try tracking down a second hand copy or buy it on Google Play. I'm not going through all that for the other books in his source list.

[Minimalist]

[EGross]

No Peter? No Paul? No Mary? Oh No!

I like the Matthew story too, where he ran away from Israel, preached among the gentiles, and a princess died, so he resurrected her from the dead and she decided to pledge her virginity to Jesus! Now that pissed off a local prince who wanted to marry her in order to inherit the throne, so he had Matthew wacked, according to the legend. And there is probably some empty grave someplace with his name on it "Matthew - Death by Virginity".

[Anomalocaris]

"Matthew - Death by Virginity".

If only the members of the catholic clergy really would resign themselves to evolutionary death by virginity.

[Confused Ape]

[Confused Ape]