[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

As I have siad elsewhere, the Romans were meticulous record keepers and there is NO contemporary record of Jesus

WRONG spaghetti-head.

I suggest you look up Pliny the Younger, Tacticus, Seutonis, and Flavius Josephus.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

WRONG spaghetti-head.

I suggest you look up Pliny the Younger, Tacticus, Seutonis, and Flavius Josephus.

I said contemporary none of those are:

Pliny the Younger (c.61 AD - c.112 AD)
Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117)
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, commonly known as Suetonius (ca. AD 69/75 – after AD 130)
Josephus (37 – c.100 AD/CE)

If he had existed and done what your special book credits him with, I ask again why did no one notice and mention it at the time?

[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

I said contemporary none of those are:

Pliny the Younger (c.61 AD - c.112 AD)
Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117)
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, commonly known as Suetonius (ca. AD 69/75 – after AD 130)
Josephus (37 – c.100 AD/CE)

If he had existed and done what your special book credits him with, I ask again why did no one notice and mention it at the time?

Jo Freddie, please lay off the pasta for once and try to think about things logically!

All of those accounts were written soon enough after the life of Christ that they should have easily known whether he existed or not, and they all agree that he did! Don't you think that if he hadn't existed somebody would have bothered to mentioned it?

[BelieverInGod]

Re: Intro

I said contemporary none of those are:

Pliny the Younger (c.61 AD - c.112 AD)
Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117)
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, commonly known as Suetonius (ca. AD 69/75 – after AD 130)
Josephus (37 – c.100 AD/CE)

If he had existed and done what your special book credits him with, I ask again why did no one notice and mention it at the time?

Perhaps because it was a backwater of the empire? There's more written about Jesus than there is about Pilate, yet nobody ever questions his existence.

God-mockers

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

Jo Freddie, please lay off the pasta for once and try to think about things logically!

Yet again you show that you are unable to grasp the concept of a homonym.

All of those accounts were written soon enough after the life of Christ that they should have easily known whether he existed or not, and they all agree that he did! Don't you think that if he hadn't existed somebody would have bothered to mentioned it?

No they where not even alive when your imaginary friend was meant to have lived.

IF he had lived then I ask again, why did no one notice at the time?

By the time they where writing there was a cult based around some fairy tales, all those people did was write down some notes about the fairy tales.

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Intro

I would think the answer to your question to be obvious.

There was an active effort to suppress the Truth(tm) about Jesus. The Romans claimed that Jews came and stole His body, so nobody would believe He was resurrected.

All the written records at the time were no doubt destroyed either by the Jews or by the Romans, in order to protect their own religions.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

I would think the answer to your question to be obvious.

There was an active effort to suppress the Truth™ about Jesus. The Romans claimed that Jews came and stole His body, so nobody would believe He was resurrected.

If they had recorded that at the time, then you would have a case, but they didn't so you don't.

All the written records at the time were no doubt destroyed either by the Jews or by the Romans, in order to protect their own religions.

Would you like to clutch at these too?

[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

Honestly Jo Freddie I don't even know why you are trying to debate this. Even the Satanspawn Richard Dawkins agrees that Jesus existed.

Tell me meatball-marauder, what about the Pauline epistles or the Synoptic Gospels? Don't you think those men would have known whether Jesus existed or not?

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

Honestly Jo Freddie I don't even know why you are trying to debate this. Even the Satanspawn Richard Dawkins agrees that Jesus existed.

And that is meant to support you case?

Tell me meatball-marauder, what about the Pauline epistles or the Synoptic Gospels? Don't you think those men would have known whether Jesus existed or not?

So your point is that some members of a cult wrote some books to support the mythology of their cult?

[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

And that is meant to support you case?

Yes, by pointing out that even one of the most rabid Godmockers there is isn't stupid enough to make a crazy argument like this unlike some people I could mention.

So your point is that some members of a cult wrote some books to support the mythology of their cult?

I'm going to ignore your hateful comments here and ask you a question. Lets assume, for the sake of argument (and Lord please forgive me for this), that Jesus did not exist. Don't you think that somebody would have mentioned it when talking about the early Christians instead of claiming he did exist like all of those examples I gave you?

Finally, here are some more examples of people and documents around that time period who claimed Jesus did exist:

Mara bar Sarapion, the Babylonian Talmud, Lucian, Celsus, Clement of Rome, Papias and Quadratus

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

Yes, by pointing out that even one of the most rabid Godmockers there is isn't stupid enough to make a crazy argument like this unlike some people I could mention.

You are still clutching at straws if you have to resort to Dawkins

I'm going to ignore your hateful comments here and ask you a question. Lets assume, for the sake of argument (and Lord please forgive me for this), that Jesus did not exist. Don't you think that somebody would have mentioned it when talking about the early Christians instead of claiming he did exist like all of those examples I gave you?

The incentive to find such a document is nothing like the incentive that you christians have to find proof of Jesus and you have been unable to do it.

Finally, here are some more examples of people and documents around that time period who claimed Jesus did exist:

Mara bar Sarapion, the Babylonian Talmud, Lucian, Celsus, Clement of Rome, Papias and Quadratus

The Letter of Mara bar Serapion to his Son, known through a sixth- or seventh-century manuscript edited in the nineteenth century by William Cureton.

The Talmud Bavli (Babylonian Talmud) was transmitted orally for centuries prior to its compilation by Jewish scholars in Babylon about the 5th century CE, so will have changed much in that time before it was written down.

Lucian of Samosata lived A.D. 120-180

Celsus was a 2nd century Greek philosopher

Pope Saint Clement I Died around 101 AD his writings are said to have been been around 96 Ad so still not contemporary

Papis c 70AD - 155AD

Quadratus (of Athens) writing circa 90AD

[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

The incentive to find such a document is nothing like the incentive that you christians have to find proof of Jesus and you have been unable to do it.

Jo Freddie, how much evidence do I need to post before you will stop blindly dismissing it out of hand (though somehow I get the idea you will never come to your senses)? Every single one of those sources I posted refers to Jesus's existence, and there is not any account or document from the era that implies he didn't exist.

If you are truly unconvinced that Jesus was a historical figure, then I don't know what to tell you except to lay off your pasta smoking. If you are just being contradictory because you are a ravioli rabble-rouser, then shame on you.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

Jo Freddie, how much evidence do I need to post before you will stop blindly dismissing it out of hand?

Well some would be a start, I have yet to see you post any.

Every single one of those sources I posted refers to Jesus's existence

And not one of those sources is an example of an account written at the time.

If you are truly unconvinced that Jesus was a historical figure

Totally unconvinced.

lay off your pasta smoking.

The only Pasta I consume is a foodstuff and not a cocaine based narcotic.

[Lycia The Repentant]

Re: Intro

Listen you fettucini fool, quit your tortellini-trolling and think about this for a second. In the scheme of ancient history, all of those accounts I have posted (which definitely count as evidence) are extraordinarily strong proof that Jesus did exist. There are tons of other historical events that are widely accepted as having happened with much less evidence that was dated much later than 40-60 years. The only reason you dispute this is because you have some perverse wish to drag other people into the depths of Hell with you.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Intro

Listen you fettucini fool, quit your tortellini-trolling and think about this for a second. In the scheme of ancient history, all of those accounts I have posted (which definitely count as evidence) are extraordinarily strong proof that Jesus did exist. There are tons of other historical events that are widely accepted as having happened with much less evidence that was dated much later than 40-60 years. The only reason you dispute this is because you have some perverse wish to drag other people into the depths of Hell with you.

I said that there is no contemporary accounts of his "tricks" and you have still to show any evidence of any, all you have mentioned so far are accounts of the myths of a minor cult written at least 60 years after the events where meant to have happened by people who where not there. If someone was to cast demons into 2000 suicidal pigs (Mark 5) would that not have had some disastrous consequences for innocent third parties leading to some record of it?

If it should be quite natural to believe in the most fantastic, illogical and unsubstantiated claims unless there was evidence to the contrary. If this stance had any viability, why stop at Jesus? Why not believe in Zeus, leprechauns and the tooth fairy?