Greetings strange casket,
It's become quite obvious that to me that it wouldn't matter what evidence you were presented with, it's all a forgery, you don't beleive
in a man called Jesus but you'd have me beleive in voices from heaven...
You didn't present any evidence.
You ignored the evidence I gave.
You have obviously never read a single scholarly reference work.
You then gave a FORGED document as evidence !
You had NO IDEA it was forged did you?
Even know you just moan about me calling it a forgery !
But you STILL haven't bothered to check the facts have you?
Next week you'll no doubt make exactly the same claims to someone else.
Your've presented no credible historical basis to date from which proves any conspiracy to create a myth of Jesus the man,
Once again - you show you didn't even READ my post.
I do NOT claim a "conspiracy"
Let me know ehen you have actually read what I posted.
your quoted correspondents only did not believe that Jesus was God incarnate. I try to explain to you that just because Arius didn't beleive
that Jesus was God, doesn't mean that he didn't beleive in Jesus the man, which he obviously did as this was the basis of his supposed heresy, and
you just pretend you can't tell the difference, which you clearly can...
We were not discussing Arius.
We were discussing the Christians who believed Jesus was NOT a physical being.
You have no answer.
I also pointed out the numerous other writers who:
* totally failed to mention Jesus,
* claimed the genealogies were FABLES,
* described Christianity in detail without mentioning Jesus,
* specifically DENIED the incarnation and the crucifxion,
* claimed the Gospels were FICTION based on myths,
* called the evangelists INVENTORS, not historians,
* pointed out Jesus was UNKNOWN to history.
You had no answer for that.
To those who think that it's unreasonable to suggest there should be historical evidence from the time saying that Jesus didn't exist, try
looking up the the Church of Scientology or the Raleans on the net, see how many pages are devoted to debunking these cult's. Is it so unreasonable
to suggest that their should be at least one critic of the day saying that Jesus the man didn't even exist?
Initially, Christianity was dismissed as a fringe cult - as a "ruinous superstition".
The Gospels did not arise till long after the alleged events.
When they did - they WERE attacked as fictional, based on myths.
They were criticised as INVENTIONS, NOT history.
Critics DID point out Jesus was unknown to history.
You keep ignoring all these facts.
You can't prove that Jesus the man didn't exist, the best you can do is prove that evidence is inconclusive...this is your article of
You can't prove the Easter Bunny didn't exist either.
But that's not how it works.
If YOU claim Jesus existed, then YOU must present the evidence and prove the case.
Instead you present statements of faith.
You ignore the evidence that Jesus was not historical.
You present FORGED documents as evidence.
You clearly have never read a single scholarly commentary on the bible.
I presented PAGES of evidence, facts, names, dates, documents.
You ignored it all.
And you have the HIDE to pretend I have faith?
Your arguments are pathetic, deranged brisket, all you have is empty faith, no facts.