notice who has the documentation there.
Originally Posted by Kapyong View Post
When Christian stories became known to the wider community they were comprehensively rejected as lies, superstition and myths.
No they weren't. but that's not what I meant. I meant there were Christians in the first century, they did exist.
I thought he was saying Christianity itself didn't start until second century in the sense of no followers of Jesus in first century.
Tacitus called it a ruinous superstition.
Not an issue.
guess what he did with his spare time?
Lucian ridiculed Christians as gullible fools who believed lieing priests.
Celsus wrote an ENTIRE BOOK on how the Christians were wrong - calling it FICTION based on MYTHS. Christians DESTROYED that book because it was so damaging to their false stories.
Celsus proves Jesus existed. you are dishonest in your application of this augment, or else you just don't have the smarts to get what I'm saying. Yes he said the miracles and stuff were lies but he did not say Jesus did not exist, he said he did exist. he disproves the Jesus myth lie.
Julian said it's lies and myths.
Porphry said it was invented.
Megacrock knows that, but chooses to lie about the facts.
all irrelevant because you misunderstood my meaning to begin with.
Neither Paul nor Peter left any authentic claims to have met Jesus. Paul had a vision, Peter's books are forged.
But if they had not (Paul didn't meet him) If Peter had not met him why would he allow everyone to say he did?
The pre mark redaction includes Peter. so in his own life time the story went around.
Here's where the moron really puts his foot in it.
Polycarp does NOT ever mention meeting John. Anyone can check Polycarp's letter here :
A quick search will show that the word "John" is NOT found once in the entire letter.
(Instead, someone ELSE, LATER claimed Polycarp met John.)
that is as wrong as it can be. you don't know what you are talking about. it's dishonest. you are totally dishionest. you didnt' do a Google search because you an obvious find that. if you had done one you would have found my website where I have that.
(of cousre he's quoting the wrong letter)
It's here on doxa
from the Calvin college website fragments of lost work
here's the quote:
For I have a more vivid recollection of what occurred at that time than of recent events (inasmuch as the experiences of childhood, keeping pace with the growth of the soul, become incorporated with it); so that I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse-his going out, too, and his coming in-his general mode of life and personal appearance, together with the discourses which he delivered to the people; also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; and how he would call their words to remembrance. Whatsoever things he had heard from them respecting the Lord, both with regard to His miracles and His teaching, Polycarp having thus received [information] from the eyewitnesses of the Word of life, would recount them all in harmony with the Scriptures. These things, through, God's mercy which was upon me, I then listened to attentively, and treasured them up not on paper, but in my heart; and I am continually, by God's grace, revolving these things accurately in my mind.
do you see the word the John there underlined?
Which is like most of the Christian claims - it's always someone ELSE that makes the claims, but when you check the facts, they are quite different.
you did not check the facts you didn't even do a google becuase had you done so you would have found my site.
here's part of one I did:
olycarp: Definition from Answers.com
Polycarp, Saint , cAD 70-AD 156?, Greek bishop of Smyrna, Father of the Church. ... It is probable that he knew John the Apostle, the disciple of Jesus. ...
www.answers.com/topic/polycarp-saint - Cached - Similar -
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Gospel of Saint John
According to the traditional order, the Gospel of St. John occupies the last place among ... He knew from the tradition of the Church that John was the last of the ... through his teacher Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John. .... mentioned by Papias, who can in turn be none other than John the Apostle (cf. ...
www.newadvent.org/cathen/08438a.htm - Cached - Similar -
Apostle John the Evangelist
St. Paul in opposing his enemies in Galatia names John explicitly along .... Here is John's mention in the Bible of the number six hundred sixty six: .... (Irenaeus himself says he did the calculation based on what those who knew John said). ..... John's disciple Polycarp, was the leader of the church in Smyrna. ...
www.cogwriter.com/john.htm - Cached - Similar -
Saint Polycarp - New World Encyclopedia
May 17, 2009 ... As mentioned above, Polycarp was (initially at least) most renowned for his .... second, it is probable that he knew John the Apostle, .... But as for these, I do not deem them worthy of receiving any account from me. ...
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Polycarp - Cached - Similar -
Bishop David's Blog: St Polycarp - a link in the chain
In his youth, Polycarp sat at the feet of the Apostle John from whom he learned the Faith. ... It says in Revelation that the Lord knew their works and tribulation and poverty .... We just mentioned St Irenaeus who became Bishop of Lyons around 178 A.D. He ... One of his key teachings was to do with the Eucharist. ...
bishopdavidsblog.blogspot.com/.../st-polycarp-link-in-chain.html - Cached - Similar -
St John, Apostle and Evangelist
St. John, directed by the instinct of love, knew him and gave notice to Peter: .... received this account from the very mouth of St. Polycarp, St. John's disciple, ... St. Chrysostom and other fathers mention that the evangelist prepared .... you do enough ": an answer, says St. Jerome, worthy the great St. John, ...
www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/JOHNEVAN.HTM - Cached - Similar -
Megacrock has been told this fact many times.
But he chooses to repeat the lie.
ahahaahahha you ignorant arrogant little know nothing! Its' been on my website for 10 years. how dare you say that?
I've known where hat quote was for ten years. if you ever said that before I am sure i showed it to you so you should know you have been disproved. If you just can't keep that knowledge in your head form one year to the next, now you know it again. you are wrong >I disproved your carp.
I kicked your ***!
Quote:yea, like he really checked the facts on that last one.
Anyone who checks the facts will find Megacrock is wrong here again too.
Papias (why can't you check your spelling Megacrock? is it because you never check anything at all?)
Papias, that's how I spell it, that's how it is spelled. What is wrong with your brain? are you leaking gay matter?
Quote:yes he sure does claim to have their words.
Papias (as quoted by master-forger Eusebius) merely makes some unclear claims about people who had heard from followers. He does NOT claim to have met anyone who met Jesus at all.
Kapyoung also attacks Euseibus as a liar and fabricator because of course our knowledge of Papias is very dependent (although not totally) upon Eusebius.
This is super ignorant to think that. Eusebius was lieda bout by liar and piece of garbage Gibbon. it was the swine Gibbon who made the pias fraud statement not Eusebius. You are have no erudition because that has been put about well enough you should know it.
why can't you read?
you are such a ignorant, unlearned unread know nothing.
Megacrock has been told this fact many times.
But he chooses to repeat this lie too
I have disproved these same know nothing assertions time after time.
The Jewish tales of Jesus are from 2nd and 3rd centuries and later.
ahahaahahahah what total ignoarnce! how dumb can you get! ahahhaha that is totally disproved. the John Rylands fragment disproves that even if you give it a wide birth. the stuff form Koester I was aruging with Grog about disproves it. that is the most ignorant carp I've ever seen.
He's basing his garbage upon the misnah but ingorning the fact that its' well known the material is form the first century. ti was written down in the second and third but it was put about orally in the first. He's assuming that's the only reliable knowledge of Jesus. he's ignoring the Gospels as though they don't exist.
no scholar believes that. no one! no educated scholarly person who studies this stuff for a living believes that. I don't think even the Jesus seminary guys are that dumb.
They tell all sorts of wild stories :
* Jesus a bastard son of a Roman soldier
* conceived during menses
* had 5 disciples
* was stoned to death in Lud
* learned black magic in Egypt
* Jesus is in hell in a boiling vat of ****
Celsus proves that stuff was going around in the first century. That's what the Jews told him about Jesus personal life and it was already old when they gave it to him. he tells us that. so that proves it was already there.
Quote:(notice how he thinks it's clever to Megacrock that's like really some huge inovative thing no one could think of).
Megacrock never repreats the actual details (even though they have been pointed out many times), but he lies that those bizarre stories support the Christian stories !
you are unlearned and unread I was researching this stuff 40 years ago. In high school. You are so bad at it you don't understand what you read, no concept of scholar caution you have no idea what historians do or what assumptions they make you can't understand what you read, you totally ignore all information that disproves your lunacy, you are really really really bad at this stuff.
I'm a historian and you are not! you don't know anything you don't' pay attention when people disprove your lies.
you are horribe at this. you suck at doing this.
Sadly, we can all see Megacrock is an continual liar for Jesus.
I am the one whit the documentation.