When does biblical history begin ?

[Aroura]

This is a blatant knowing lie. Produce that evidence now! You have the floor. All eyes are upon you.

Not a lie at all. The general consensus amongst historians world wide is that Jesus was a real person who died by crucifixion under punctious pilot, the Roman prefect at the time. I remember even when I went to a public high school, Jesus' was mentioned in our World History book as the man who founded Christianity. His existence is just as much a historical fact as Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, and Mohammed. You can deny it all you want I suppose, but that is not what is widely accepted by people who actually study/investigate history.

Hi!
I won't be a dick, I promise, but let me clarify.

Nearly all New Testament scholars agree that Jesus was a real person.
This is not the same as historians.  So when you use the generic term "historians", you are inaccurate and might be called out on it.
Although many historians of a more general nature do accept that he existed and was crucified, but that is becoming more and more widely questioned. And there is certainly no consensus that he founded Christianity at all (and certainly none that he was resurrected or any of the important stuff that would make him the Son of God), as a matter of fact, as it is widely agreed that nothing was written about him until at least 70 years after his death, the widely accepted scholarly theory is that Paul started Christianity.

One of the reasons these facts are often questioned is because New Testament scholars would have a vested interest in finding historical evidence, and their biases are becoming more and more widely recognized.

There is quite a lot of evidence that Mohammad and Cleopatra actually lived, there is actually quite a lack of evidence for Jesus.  There is some, I admit, for a wandering Jewish person who was teaching radical religion in the area, as there were a number of Jewish fringe groups at that time.  
But even assuming there was a wondering Jewish priest named Jesus who was later crucified does absolutely nothing to prove the accuracy of the other 99% of the claims in the New Testament.

Also as a side note, you said there was historical agreement that the apostles existed? and that is simple not at all true, 
Even among biblical scholars, there is a wide division of opinion on this topic.

Hope I wasn't a dick, I tried not to be!  Just sharing info.

[Huggy Bear]

*emphasis mine*
You do realize that the King James version of the bible was published in 1611 right? Not to mention the name also appears in the Wycliffe version of the bible (although it's written in middle english) published in the late 1300's

Your mistake is that you don't have an original 1611 KJV.  Your KJV was written after 1885.  

Your Wycliffe version was written well after the 14th Century.

*empasis mine*

---

---

Please tell me, what name is stated in verses 23 and 25 at the top of the page, right-hand column?

[Little Rik]

the widely accepted scholarly theory is that Paul started Christianity.

That is bizarre.  

Paul never went to India yet during his time Christianity was already under way there.


So you tell me how it is possible that Paul started Christianity?

Check the dates Aro so you will not make mistakes such as this again.  

[Aroura]

the widely accepted scholarly theory is that Paul started Christianity.

That is bizarre.  

Paul never went to India yet during his time Christianity was already under way there.


So you tell me how it is possible that Paul started Christianity?

Check the dates Aro so you will not make mistakes such as this again.  

Citation? Seems like you are drawing your own conclusion that doesn't necessarily follow.

Even the Christian sources I read say Christianity spread to India between the years 70 and 100.  And Paul is actually personally credited with spreading Christianity to the east. The rest having to do with it continuing to spread through already established Jewish groups.

Also, Paul starting it and where he personally traveled has nothing to do with where it ended up in his lifetime.

He starts it in location A.
It spreads to location B, C and D through word of mouth and dissatisfied Jews.  Paul does not have to personally spread it.

Check your own facts, Rik.  There is no evidence it existed in Jesus supposed lifetime. It spread 70 to 100 years after, during and after Paul's lifetime.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Your mistake is that you don't have an original 1611 KJV.  Your KJV was written after 1885.  

Your Wycliffe version was written well after the 14th Century.

*empasis mine*

---

---

Please tell me, what name is stated in verses 23 and 25 at the top of the page, right-hand column?

That's a fake.  You can always tell fakes because they use words that were not in existence at the time the document was supposedly written.  They might look impressive but they are just BS con jobs.

[Little Rik]

That is bizarre.  

Paul never went to India yet during his time Christianity was already under way there.


So you tell me how it is possible that Paul started Christianity?

Check the dates Aro so you will not make mistakes such as this again.  

Citation? Seems like you are drawing your own conclusion that doesn't necessarily follow.

Even the Christian sources I read say Christianity spread to India between the years 70 and 100.  And Paul is actually personally credited with spreading Christianity to the east. The rest having to do with it continuing to spread through already established Jewish groups.

Also, Paul starting it and where he personally traveled has nothing to do with where it ended up in his lifetime.

He starts it in location A.
It spreads to location B, C and D through word of mouth and dissatisfied Jews.  Paul does not have to personally spread it.

Check your own facts, Rik.  There is no evidence it existed in Jesus supposed lifetime. It spread 70 to 100 years after, during and after Paul's lifetime.

Wrong once again Aro.

There is absolutely nothing that say that Paul ever went to India.
Nothing.
But there is tons of history about the Apostle Thomas that went to India.
There is also tons of history about the fact that Christianity started in south India in the 52 A.D. which is before the dates that you
came up with.
Paul die in Rome sometime between 62 and 67 A.D.
In those times people didn't have the internet or other forms of media so news could not possibly spread fast.
If you consider that Paul die at the age of 61-62 and never went to India then it would be impossible for Him to have spread Christianity there in 8-9 years period between when Christianity in India started and his death.

Check your facts Aro.  

[Aroura]

Citation? Seems like you are drawing your own conclusion that doesn't necessarily follow.

Even the Christian sources I read say Christianity spread to India between the years 70 and 100.  And Paul is actually personally credited with spreading Christianity to the east. The rest having to do with it continuing to spread through already established Jewish groups.

Also, Paul starting it and where he personally traveled has nothing to do with where it ended up in his lifetime.

He starts it in location A.
It spreads to location B, C and D through word of mouth and dissatisfied Jews.  Paul does not have to personally spread it.

Check your own facts, Rik.  There is no evidence it existed in Jesus supposed lifetime. It spread 70 to 100 years after, during and after Paul's lifetime.

Wrong once again Aro.  

There is absolutely nothing that say that Paul ever went to India.
Nothing.
But there is tons of history about the Apostle Thomas that went to India.
There is also tons of history about the fact that Christianity started in south India in the 52 A.D. which is before the dates that you
came up with.
Paul die in Rome sometime between 62 and 67 A.D.
In those times people didn't have the internet or other forms of media so news could not possibly spread fast.
If you consider that Paul die at the age of 61-62 and never went to India then it would be impossible for Him to have spread Christianity there in 8-9 years period between when Christianity in India started and his death.

Check your facts Aro.  

I didn't say Paul went to India. I said he is credited with spreading it to the east.   

I agree it started AFTER Christ supposedly died.  ok, so 50 years (Taking your word with no link).  It started during Paul's Lifetime, not Jesus.  YOU agree with me.
You don't think word of mouth could spread in 5 to 10 years? That is dumb.  It only takes a few months to travel from the middle east to India by caravan.  It could have spread there in under a year. The spread of Christianity is pretty well documented.  It spread there after Paul started it in the near east.  Even biblical scholars agree with that.  You know more than biblical scholars, now?

Maybe you should check your reading comprehension skills.   And please don't call me "Aro".  Thanks

P.s. I am checking my facts, and I'm linking my sources as well.  Which is more than I can say for you.

[Little Rik]

Wrong once again Aro.  

There is absolutely nothing that say that Paul ever went to India.
Nothing.
But there is tons of history about the Apostle Thomas that went to India.
There is also tons of history about the fact that Christianity started in south India in the 52 A.D. which is before the dates that you
came up with.
Paul die in Rome sometime between 62 and 67 A.D.
In those times people didn't have the internet or other forms of media so news could not possibly spread fast.
If you consider that Paul die at the age of 61-62 and never went to India then it would be impossible for Him to have spread Christianity there in 8-9 years period between when Christianity in India started and his death.

Check your facts Aro.  

I didn't say Paul went to India. I said he is credited with spreading it to the east.   

I agree it started AFTER Christ supposedly died.  ok, so 50 years (Taking your word with no link).  It started during Paul's Lifetime, not Jesus.  YOU agree with me.
You don't think word of mouth could spread in 5 to 10 years? That is dumb.  It only takes a few months to travel from the middle east to India by caravan.  It could have spread there in under a year. The spread of Christianity is pretty well documented.  It spread there after Paul started it in the near east.  Even biblical scholars agree with that.  You know more than biblical scholars, now?

Maybe you should check your reading comprehension skills.   And please don't call me "Aro".  Thanks

P.s. I am checking my facts, and I'm linking my sources as well.  Which is more than I can say for you.

Is getting even more bizarre as your fantasy get a solid grip.  

1) If Christianity would have spread from the middle east where Paul was to India by people traveling in caravan it would have spread first in what is now Pakistan and then in north India but history tell us that it spread in south India so caravans are off.
It come obvious that someone came by ship not by caravan and considering that Paul was preaching in the middle east and then end up in Rome then your idea is just a guess that doesn't stand up.

2) Most people don't just start believing in a religion or philosophy of life just because someone spread the word that they heard from somebody else which again was spread by somebody else.
In most cases there got to be a very strong personality that instill the new philosophy of life and if you consider that before the Christianity was established people in India follow Shiva and Krishna for countless generations then it is obvious that people wouldn't give away one philosophy for a new one unless the one who bring the new one would have a very strong personality and offer more than the previous message that is why the idea that St. Thomas was the one who started Christianity in India make sense while the idea that Paul was the one doesn't make an inch of sense.  

[Aroura]

I didn't say Paul went to India. I said he is credited with spreading it to the east.   

I agree it started AFTER Christ supposedly died.  ok, so 50 years (Taking your word with no link).  It started during Paul's Lifetime, not Jesus.  YOU agree with me.
You don't think word of mouth could spread in 5 to 10 years? That is dumb.  It only takes a few months to travel from the middle east to India by caravan.  It could have spread there in under a year. The spread of Christianity is pretty well documented.  It spread there after Paul started it in the near east.  Even biblical scholars agree with that.  You know more than biblical scholars, now?

Maybe you should check your reading comprehension skills.   And please don't call me "Aro".  Thanks

P.s. I am checking my facts, and I'm linking my sources as well.  Which is more than I can say for you.

Is getting even more bizarre as your fantasy get a solid grip.  

1) If Christianity would have spread from the middle east where Paul was to India by people traveling in caravan it would have spread first in what is now Pakistan and then in north India but history tell us that it spread in south India so caravans are off.
It come obvious that someone came by ship not by caravan and considering that Paul was preaching in the middle east and then end up in Rome then your idea is just a guess that doesn't stand up.

2) Most people don't just start believing in a religion or philosophy of life just because someone spread the word that they heard from somebody else which again was spread by somebody else.
In most cases there got to be a very strong personality that instill the new philosophy of life and if you consider that before the Christianity was established people in India follow Shiva and Krishna for countless generations then it is obvious that people wouldn't give away one philosophy for a new one unless the one who bring the new one would have a very strong personality and offer more than the previous message that is why the idea that St. Thomas was the one who started Christianity in India make sense while the idea that Paul was the one doesn't make an inch of sense.  

Still no sources.  I'm sorry, but you are the one making assumptions about how and why things worked as they did.  I was just listing historical facts.

Sorry Rik, you are projecting the fantasy bit.  I think I see why so many people have you on ignore.

[Little Rik]

Is getting even more bizarre as your fantasy get a solid grip.  

1) If Christianity would have spread from the middle east where Paul was to India by people traveling in caravan it would have spread first in what is now Pakistan and then in north India but history tell us that it spread in south India so caravans are off.
It come obvious that someone came by ship not by caravan and considering that Paul was preaching in the middle east and then end up in Rome then your idea is just a guess that doesn't stand up.

2) Most people don't just start believing in a religion or philosophy of life just because someone spread the word that they heard from somebody else which again was spread by somebody else.
In most cases there got to be a very strong personality that instill the new philosophy of life and if you consider that before the Christianity was established people in India follow Shiva and Krishna for countless generations then it is obvious that people wouldn't give away one philosophy for a new one unless the one who bring the new one would have a very strong personality and offer more than the previous message that is why the idea that St. Thomas was the one who started Christianity in India make sense while the idea that Paul was the one doesn't make an inch of sense.  

Still no sources.  I'm sorry, but you are the one making assumptions about how and why things worked as they did.  I was just listing historical facts.

Sorry Rik, you are projecting the fantasy bit.  I think I see why so many people have you on ignore.

You see women.  
I knock down all your assumptions one by one and now not having any more grip to hang on you hide your failing behind the story that I don't produce sources.

You are getting totally pathetic.  
You know very well that there are tons and tons of historical reports about Thomas in south India about Paul in the middle east and Rome and about 52 A.D. when Christianity started in India and all the rest.
I don't think your problem is about laziness into going in your search engine and click this or that.
Your problem is that you can't stand to be told that you are wrong.
The same apply to all those that put me in the ignore list.

They also can not stand to be found wrong time and time again.