User Name:


FAQ Donate Join

Atheist Community of Austin
Scholar facts about Jesus

Hey all, I will not go in depth. But on this website i saw many opposing opinions to what was being said on this boards on the subject of Jesus (Mithra connection, validity of historical accounts etc.) I just wonder what is your take on information presented by this website fellow atheists.

The facts are not found in apologetics. The facts can be found in scholarly works written by unbiased experts. I don't care what people think who only look for support to continue to believe in ancient myths. You can read one book and what people who make a living off of that one book write or you can look for what is true. Everyone can do that - they have the right.

Unknown authors wrote the Gospels forty to seventy years after the supposed death of Jesus. There are no eyewitness accounts - and the names given the Gospels are just titles. There are no originals and nobody knows what was originally written.

There is an excellent witness to the events in Judaea in the first half of the first century AD, Philo of Alexandria. Philo did not write one word about Jesus or Christianity.

Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism (combining of beliefs) in the ancient world. There were many Jesuses but the story was a cultural construct. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD - the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs. There were never 12 disciples or a master. The story was invented to legitimize the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was fashioned on pagan goddesses and she was not a virgin. Unlike Jesus and Mary a real historical figures, long before Jesus, Julius Caesar has a mass of evidence.

Nothing in Christianity was original it had all been in the literature for centuries. When the Jews were defeated and the temple at Jerusalem was utterly destroyed that gave the Christian churches the ability to take over and prevail.

There were many sects of Christianity (not just one) in Rome, dozens of competing son/sun of god cults. The first Jesus believers claimed he was a spirit. Later he was born a human and was put to death. The whole story was assembled to try to unify a fragmented and fractious messianic religious movement. In the mid-2nd century the Jewish faith was purged from Christianity. The Christians remained a minority until one faction formed a political alliance with the Roman State. Orthodox Christianity remained unpopular for centuries and persecution was necessary to impose it on the people. There are in fact 200 gospels, epistles and other books concerning the mythical life of Jesus. Political considerations in the late 2nd century led to the selection of just four approved gospels and the rejection of others. They did later accept about 23 more books, but in fact all of the stories are fiction. There were no contemporary historians that mentioned Jesus.

In 325 CE, when the Council of Bishops in Rome decided to make an official canon there were thousands of books, epistles, and gospels existing throughout Europe. They were both Hebrew and Greek scriptures, and The Council of Nicea decided to discard and destroy each and every book, epistle, and gospel that did not agree with their theology, which was the doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. The "chosen Gospels" were randomly assigned authorship over a hundred years after they were written.

According to the bible when Jesus was crucified the heavens and earth affirmed his deity, causing a three-hour eclipse of the sun over all the earth. There was an earthquake causing Jerusalem's temple curtain to be split into, and many Jewish saints resurrected from their graves appearing to the people in Jerusalem. Within three days, the Son of God, defeated Satan, rose from the dead appeared to his disciples, then ascended into heaven. A story that would not of escaped the attention of the historians worldwide. Scholars who do objective investigations into history have found no confirmation of this story in the writings of non-Christian Jewish, Greek, and Roman writers.

Philo Judaeus (contemporary historian I mentioned) wrote detailed accounts of the Jewish events that occurred in the surrounding area. Not once, in all of his volumes of writings, is a single account of a Jesus. There is no mention of Jesus in Seneca's writings, or from the historian Pliny the Elder. If a figure as famous as the Gospels claim Jesus was existed at the same time of these historians, why did none of them ever hear of Him? Not one Jewish, Greek, or Roman writer, even those who lived in the Middle East, much less anywhere else on the earth, who ever mention him during his supposed life time.

Paul admits that he did not know Jesus during Jesus' lifetime. All of Paul's theology is based on his own revelations, or visions. There is nothing in all of Paul's writings that state he ever met the living Jesus, and he does not talk about Jesus' life on earth. His accounts about a Jesus had to have come from visions or hearsay. Paul's visions, and most of his theology, can be found in Mithraism. In Mithraism, the central figure is the mythical Mithras, who died for the sins of mankind and was resurrected. Believers in Mithras were rewarded with eternal life. Part of the Mithraic communion liturgy included the words, "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation." Mithraism had included the ritual a long time before Christ was born. Mithraism originated in the city of Tarsus in Cilicia, the place the apostle Paul came from.

The apostle Paul claims that he got the instructions for the Lord's Supper directly from Jesus. The Lord's supper was not invented by Paul, but was borrowed by him from Mithraism, the mystery religion that existed long before Christianity and was Christianity's chief competitor up until the time of Constantine. The apostle Paul never mentions the virgin birth. Paul says that Jesus was "born of a woman," (not a virgin woman) Galatians 4:4. Why would he leave out this amazing miracle?

Mary and Joseph resided in Nazareth, and Nazareth was just a pile of rocks; it was never a city. Matthew says that Herod, in an attempt to kill the newborn Messiah, had all the male children two years old and under put to death in Bethlehem, and that this was in fulfillment of prophecy. Herod committed many horrible crimes recorded by ancient historians like Josephus, who had no use for Herod, but no historian ever mentions these killing that would have been Herod's greatest crime by far. If killing of this magnitude had occurred, why didn't anyone write about it? When Judas betrayed Jesus, according to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests "weighed out thirty pieces of silver" to give to Judas. In Jesus' time, minted coins were used - currency was not "weighed out." There were no "pieces of silver" used as currency in the supposed time of Jesus - they had gone out of circulation about 300 years before. Matthew 27:39 and Mark 15:27 say Jesus was crucified between two thieves. It is a historical fact that the Romans did not crucify thieves. Luke 23:44-45, there occurred "about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour, and the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst." Yet not a single mention of such a three hour ecliptic event got recorded by anyone, including the astronomers and astrologers, anywhere in the world, including Pliny the Elder and Seneca who both recorded eclipses from other dates. Solar eclipses can't occur during a full moon and Passovers always occur during full moons. Not a single contemporary person writes about the earthquake described in Matthew 27:51-54 where the earth shook, rocks were rent, and graves opened.

The Gospels mention innumerable times the great multitudes that followed Jesus and crowds of people who congregated to hear him. Luke 5:15 says that there grew "a fame abroad of him." Not one historian, philosopher or poet living during the time of Jesus ever mentions him. The Gospels represent Jesus as a exalted celebrated prophet, with great multitudes of people who knew about him, including the greatest Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities of the area, and not one person records his existence during his lifetime. The Gospels were not written in Jesus lifetime or a named eyewitness' written account that has ever existed.

The Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that the original church of Jerusalem was an extremist Jewish movement violently opposed to the influence and dominance of Rome. Nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the name Jesus mentioned, and Christianity had no support in the translations. The Dead Sea Scrolls challenged the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and Christianity as the embodiment of the message of Christ. The Dead Sea Scrolls only mentions "teachers of righteousness" that were part of an ultra conservative messianic Jewish movement based in Qumran going back at least 100 years BCE. The Dead Scrolls also indicate that many of the practices that people now regard as the Christians (New Testament) were not new. The Lord's Prayer and the Lord's Supper can be traced to the Qumrans, also going back at least one century before Jesus' virgin birth.

The Dead Sea Scrolls tell of a movement that was a Jewish apocalyptic cult waiting to do battle with the forces of evil in which righteousness would prevail. The Qumrans were making themselves ready for the great battle in which they firmly believed that the forces of evil would die upon the blazing spears held by the hands of the Sons of Light.

In the year 70 CE the Romans utterly destroyed the people of Qumran and the Temple in Jerusalem. Until 70 CE the Qumrans were waiting with great faith for the messiah to appear and deliver them. The messiah, according to Jewish belief, was not a God that would deliver his people by clearing their way to heaven. The messiah was to be an empowered King who would destroy the enemies of the Jews and regain their Holy Land.

Everything Christians know about Christianity is false. Their beliefs are based on Old World Jewish superstitions in a messiah who never came, and colorful layers of various pagan beliefs of the Roman culture.

Paul invented a messiah that had come and died for people's sins, but at the time they didn't know he was god, three-fourths of the people in the Roman Empire were slaves. Paul was giving the slaves a sense of freedom when they were still slaves, and access to the Kingdom of God in Heaven. Paul took his message to illiterate peasants and other unfortunate people.

Neither the Dead Sea Scrolls nor any the other facts are being explained. That's what makes it easy to enslave people with religious superstition.

Hey it is amazing to read all of this, such knowledge is always pleasing ot no end, it is a shame that I am not schooled in history as you are to have a discussion of your caliber. Thanks a lot for your contribution, I only imagine how much time and will you've put into this. However, I would really love some pointers Linda.

I mean what works can I read and such in your opinion to know and verify at least a half of what you said. I am willing to go far with studying these, so thanks in advance!

I apologize for double posting indeed. But here is someone answering the claim that Chrisitanity borrowed from Mithraism, what is your take on this Linda?

In modern scholarship the best historians and Christian apologists can use only what documents they have available to them. If they only have hearsay accounts without evidence then they haven't got history they have myth. Christian apologists interpolate, guess and use hearsay because of the lack of evidence, and this dubious information becomes encyclopedic reference work.

The claim for authenticity of the burial box of James proved particularly embarrassing for those who believed them authentic without question. Just a few months later, archaeologists determined the inscription as an obvious forgery. The problem for whoever tried to perpetrate this deception was the fact that archaeologists do want to know the truth.

Blind faith is capitulation to ignorance, probably the safest and easiest route. It is much more difficult to find the answers by pursuing the facts through the intellectual process. That way we know what is true and what is a fabrication, and unfortunately it is the truth that advances human understanding. Anyone willing to put out the effort can get the information, but the religious don't want to find anything that isn't true about what they already believe.

What I had written was evidence the names of historians that never wrote one word about Jesus that lived in the same place and time - like giving dates that proves what happened and when it happened. What is or is not a forgery etc.

REFERENCE: The New Testament. Most Bibles, when introducing the Gospels, as well as other writings that are contained in the canon, inform that the authors are anonymous and unknown.

REFERENCE: Mithraism The Book - David Ulansey, 'The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries', in which he convincingly shows that Mithraism originated in the city of Tarsus in Cilicia. That is where Paul of Tarsus came from.

REFERENCE: The Bible - Paul never cites the Gospels because the Gospels come much later. More proof of that is that Paul never refers to them.

REFERENCE: The Bible - In the Old Testament there are books mentioned that can not be found in the Bible, like the book of Jashar, mentioned in Joshua 10:13. That's not the only one, there are many. That fact certainly does indicate that there are missing Gospels.

REFERENCE: This is a book - 'The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence' - backs up no historian from his era wrote a single word about the Jesus. Also there is an abidance of scholarly work on this subject.

REFERENCE: The Bible - Look at the Gospel of Mark: he knows nothing of the virgin birth, of the Sermon on the Mount, of the Lord's prayer, or of other important facts of the supposed life of Christ. Matthew and Luke copied Mark and added this stuff.

REFERENCES: The Bible - Dead Sea Scrolls. Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 and 7:28 - Jesus delivered the Lord's Prayer during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes. Luke 11:1-4 he delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount. But the Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the Sermon on the Mount and The Lords Prayer existed hundreds of years before the supposed life of Jesus.

REFERENCE: Erasmus, four hundred years ago, said the Gospels were originally written in Greek. The Gospel of John is largely composed of the speculations of Greek philosophy.

REFERENCE: The Bible - Matthew 2:1 says Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, but Luke 2:2 says Jesus was born during the first census in Israel, while Quirinius was governor of Syria. Herod died in March of 4 BC and the census took place in 6 and 7 AD, about 10 years after Herod's death. Luke says this was the first census that took place under Quirinius after Herod's kingdom had been divided between his three sons in 4 B.C. The Jewish historian Josephus recorded that Herod the Great died in 4 BC.

REFERENCE: Josephus (Jewish Historian) says that Varus was governor of Syria at Herod's death and Varus was governor in 4 B.C.

REFERENCE: Historians I gave you the names of the historians that were eyewitnesses that didn't record a thing about the events in the Bible. I named the historians that lived at the time that didn't record Herod killed all babies up to two years old in Bethlehem.

Ugarit - Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic by Frank Cross - Cambridge Harvard University Press. The book has the history of religion of Israel compared to Ugaritic texts.

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus. There is not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.

The Nag Hammadi texts contained fifty-two books that were not approved as gospel called "heretical" books written in Coptic script which include gospels of Philip, James, Thomas, John and others. Archeologists have dated them at around 350-400 C.E. They are only copies from previous copies. None of the original texts exist. Scholars date these books as no later than 120-150 C.E. Others have put it closer to 140 C.E. The Judas gospel, a copy written in Coptic, dates to around the third to the fourth century. The original Greek version probably dates to between 130 and 170 C.E., around the same time as the Nag Hammadi texts. Gnostic texts could only have its unknown authors writing well after the alleged life of Jesus, they cannot serve as historical evidence of Jesus anymore than the canonical versions. The Nag Hammadi texts are hearsay.

Simply determining the dates of the documents and the birth dates of the authors is one way of knowing if it is an eyewitness account. It doesn't matter what these people wrote about Jesus; an author who writes after the alleged happening and gives no detectable sources for his material can only give example of hearsay. All of these ancient writings about Jesus came from the circulation of myths and superstition, and that does not require facts or evidence. There is no evidence for Jesus existence; belief in Jesus is about people who believed stories that were told about something that happened long after the event.

The picture of Jesus in the Greek Gospels, eating with tax-collectors, satirizing the traditions of his people, welcoming sinners and ridiculing Torah piety are all expressions of Gentile anti-Judaism. Gentiles with contempt for Judaism are the reason to have Jesus behaving in this manner. It is for this same reason the New Testament has Jerusalem destroyed because her people had rejected the messiah, when in fact they were fighting a messianic war against the Roman. This is all Hellenistic anti-Semitism. Christianity is a Gentile mission concocted by the Romans to assimilate the Jews and all other religions. It was the synchronism of pagan and Jewish religions.

Other forgeries by the church Fathers, are the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and the Apostolic Canons and Constitutions, are all forgeries of the early church Fathers.

There are numerous forged works attributed to many of the Fathers of the early church, listed under the word Pseudo, or false. The Apostles Creed forged by the Fathers several centuries after the Apostles. The Creed is the work of twelve separate writers.

There is nothing that I have ever read by any secular scholar and some Biblical scholars that would indicate that James and Paul had any relationship because they did not agree on the Jewish religion. There was no Christianity at that time - that is a myth - it was started after the Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed and James (the head of the Jewish Temple at Jerusalem) was dead. Then Paul exalted a fictional Jesus above James once James was dead. Paul (with assistance of Rome) started spreading his mixed Jewish/ Pagan gospel.

Josephus's writings provide a detailed list of the cities of Galilee but Nazareth is not mentioned in all his volumes of writing. None of the New Testament epistle writers ever mentions Nazareth or a Jesus of Nazareth even though most of the epistles appeared before the gospels. In fact no one mentions Nazareth until the 40 years after the assumed death of Jesus in the Gospels. Apologists claim Nazareth was just an insignificant village but how did they come by this information? No one recorded it. The Gospels refer to Nazareth as a city and the historians of that period would have known about a city of Nazareth if that city existed.

Wow... so Basically when one christian saw arguments presented by you and whole hearsay thing, the best he could do is direct me to this webpage and say that you are copy-paster and all your facts are plain idiocy.

I wonder what you would have answered to him Linda, but he will most certaintly not go to this board unfortunately, in addition he is still trying to persuade me and I'm a bit lost on what the hell does he need else. Since I myself examined most of your information and it seems like mostly a fair game to me.

Sorry there are no edit buttons, so I have to add information from time to time. And he keeps sending me stuff, but I've chosen not to reply yet since it is to early to do that, especially without your counter to this matters.

So additionaly he added the following: "all the evidence, therefore it is not important. Please note that Jesus was not super popular person in his lifetime, according to some historians. During his ministry there were many other preachers, more popular than he. This justifies the lack of mention of him by historians of his time. In this context, we must view the gospels as a historical document. And Doubting, refuting, historicity of the gospels, I believe, is meaningless.

And he backs up his talk with the following link it is in russian but I've used google toolbar tio translate all the page, and it makes sense, so it will make sense for you abotu the information there as well using the same method. Thanks a lot for your contribution so far, I've read some interesting things.

Oh, in addition he linked to this site and basically said you are one of the peope who "By the 21st century, the non-existence of Jesus had become a dead thesis within academia. Nevertheless, a number of proponents continue to advocate the theory, often through the internet."

Though When I read the article I did find some things strange and only then noticed the disclaimer that it is far from neutral, the same vibe I was getting while reading. He also cited from the first link: "As such, the New Testament scholar James Dunn describes the mythical Jesus theory as a "thoroughly dead thesis". does a mear page on wikipedia or scholars mentioned there disproove what you've been saying all along? Or the dog is dug somewhere else?

And another Christian argued that Jesus was mentioned in the Quran, and since we can't dispute the fact about muhhamad's existence, he turns out right about jesus.

I apologize If I am bothering you with maybe something you've been dealt with over and over again, but unfortunately I study this all a few days only thanks to you, so I cannot have conclusive, solid and convincing answers to everything about the manner, or the big picture if you will.

Reckie said, "So additionaly he added the following: "all the evidence, therefore it is not important. Please note that Jesus was not super popular person in his lifetime, according to some historians. During his ministry there were many other preachers, more popular than he. This justifies the lack of mention of him by historians of his time. In this context, we must view the gospels as a historical document. And Doubting, refuting, historicity of the gospels, I believe, is meaningless."

Statements about Jesus' fame in the Bible:

Luke 4:37 fame "And the report about Him was spreading into every locality." The reports about the miracle working Jesus were widespread according to Luke.

Luke 4:14 And Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about Him spread through all the surrounding district.

Luke 7:17 This report concerning Him went out all over Judea and in all the surrounding district.

Mark 4:41 He began to teach again by the sea. And such a very large crowd gathered to Him that He got into a boat in the sea and sat down; and the whole crowd was by the sea on the land.

Mark 1:28. At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, And immediately his fame spread abroad throughout all the region round about Galilee.

Matthew 4:24 News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed, and he healed them

Matthew 9:31 But they went out and spread the news about Him throughout all that land.

Mark 1:45 But he went out and began to proclaim it freely and to spread the news around, to such an extent that Jesus could no longer publicly enter a city, but stayed out in unpopulated areas; and they were coming to Him from everywhere.

Matthew 27, at the death of Jesus, many dead people came out of their graves and appeared to many. No historian mentions it. None of the other gospels mentions it. They didn't notice dead people walking around? The disciples in the book of Acts, as Luke tells the story, don't even mention it. Apparently when Luke wrote the book of Acts, he had never heard of the story written in Matthew.

That sounds like he was pretty well known and it's in the Bible so it must be true. Ha!

Pliny is an eyewitness historian (lived at that time in that place) where the earthquakes and eclipses (found in Matthew). Pliny collected data on all manner of natural and astronomical phenomena, even those which were legendary - which he himself did not necessarily regard as factual, but he records nothing about the beliefs of Christians, or an earthquake or darkening of the skies at a crucifixion, or any star of Bethlehem.

Tacitus was Rome's greatest historian. He does not mention Jesus or the Gospel events in those years, the years Jesus' ministry, death, and resurrection.

New Testament books do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD. That is about 350 years after the time the Church claims that a Jesus Christ lived. That can be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia. There is a great deal of information in the Catholic Encyclopedia and what I have found there is true. I was very surprised since there is so much Catholic bashing - maybe they don't like the truth.

"Guide to the Bible" is a book by Isaac Asimov - He was an atheist - I guess your friend would think he was bias. That's what I think about Biblical Scholars. I believe Isaac Asimov because he knew a great deal about science and he was very honest. I also determined what was true myself through my own research.

Reckie said, "And another Christian argued that Jesus was mentioned in the Quran, and since we can't dispute the fact about muhhamad's existence, he turns out right about jesus."

Muhammad was born in Arabia in the year 570 of the Christian era (yr. 1400) and he died after 63 years. Muhammad lived about 600 years after Jesus.

Muhammad heard the voice of the angel Gabriel, who spoke to Muhammad with the word of God. Muslim's belief based on traditions, that Prophet Muhammad was illiterate. That has been debated, but it explains why he never wrote anything. Jesus never wrote anything either. The first message God gave Muhammad was the same message he had given to Abraham in the Old Testament. There is only one true God; all other gods are false, and that he (Muhammad) must spread the word. Muhammad received messages from God through the angel Gabriel.

The angel Gabriel came one night to Muhammad and he flew on the back of a winged, horse-like creature to Jerusalem to visit the temple that was built by King Solomon. At the Temple, Muhammad prayed with Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Gabriel then carried Muhammad up to heaven, where Muhammad met God. Moslems consider Jerusalem to be the third most holy city, after Mecca and Medina because of the Angel Gabriel took Muhammad there. The Dome of the Rock is also a holy place because it covers the place where Muhammad is said to have stepped as he began his ascent to heaven.

Muhammad became sick and died at the age of 62. Muhammad did not write the Qur'an. Various editions of the Qur'an were written down in the 30 years or so following the death of Muhammad, but Muslim histories, such as Sahih Bukhari, tell us that these were contradictory and incomplete.

After the death of most of the eyewitnesses at the battle of Yamama an earnest attempt was made to put together the sayings of Muhammad. According to al-Bukhari no single person could remember the whole of the Qur'an, and different parts were taken from different people. The accounts were in different dialects, and were consequently translated into the Arabic of the Qur'an at the time they were written down. Once the new official collection of the Qur'an had been produced the order went out to destroy all the other variants. The official document was made in the reign of the Caliph Uthman, and is called the "Uthmanic collection."

The length of time between the death of Muhammad and the writing of the Qur'an was about the same as the time between the ascension of Jesus and the writing of the Gospels.

The Quran completely contradicts the claims that Jesus was God, or that he was in any way greater than a simple prophet. The Qur'an denies the death of Jesus on the cross.

In my opinion the New Testament and the Qur'an are just about the same in their lack of credibility. Why would anyone try to use that a proof of anything.

Eusebius served as an ecclesiastical church historian and bishop, and he had great influence in the early Church. Eusebius openly advocated the use of fraud and deception in furthering the interests of the Church. Eusebius wrote "it may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who want to be deceived."

Ignatius Loyola of the 16th century even wrote: "We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides" (a la Alice in Wonderland). Considering what we know about the early Church's intolerant and biased position these so-called historical writings that supports the Church are not reliable evidence.

In Dec. 15, 2009 ScienceDaily > A biblical expert at the University of Chicago, Margaret M. Mitchell, together with experts in micro-chemical analysis and medieval bookmaking, has concluded that one of the University Library's most enigmatic possessions is a forgery. Scholars have argued for nearly 70 years over the provenance of what's called the Archaic Mark, a 44-page miniature book, known as a "codex," which contains the complete 16-chapter text of the Gospel of Mark in minuscule handwritten text. The manuscript, which also includes 16 colorful illustrations, has long been believed to be either an important witness to the early text of the gospel or a modern forgery, said Mitchell, Professor of New Testament and Early Christian Literature. "The mystery is now solved from textual, chemical, and codicological (bookmaking) angles," said Mitchell, who first became intrigued by the codex when she saw it as a graduate student in 1982. Comprehensive analysis demonstrates that it is not a genuine Byzantine manuscript, but a counterfeit, she said, "made somewhere between 1874 and the first decades of the 20th century."

I believe the only thing left is to say that I could argue with apologist on and on but I know it does nothing. It is the same old arguments about the authenticity of their beliefs but I do not have any interest. It is really a matter of finding the facts. I have only given you a fraction of the facts that I could give but it would take a very long time to tell the whole story. That is why people need to find things by looking into history from unbiased sources. Read a historical account of the Council of Nicaea, convened by the Emperor Constantine. Read secular ancient history and the history of the Roman Empire.

What I have written is backed up by facts. I don't care to go any further with these unfounded arguments that I have already given facts about (the Gospels are not eyewitness accounts of Jesus). This is a waste of time when I have already given the evidence.

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup