View previous topic | View next topic

Faith

Page 1 of 6
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

deehethe
864265.  Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:31 pm Reply with quote

I suggest when making fun about faith and makeing such statements about no census was taken at the birth of Jesus and the Bible was written 300 years after Christ you research your subjet before coming out with such inaccurate drivel

 
Spud McLaren
864266.  Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:34 pm Reply with quote

And the accurate sources would be...?

Has anyone asserted that the Bible was written 300 years after Christ? The New Testament, yes. But to assert such a thing about the entire Bible would stretch one's credibility a tad.

 
Posital
864275.  Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:06 pm Reply with quote

Yes - do let us know your sources, deehehe...

 
Arcane
864282.  Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:22 pm Reply with quote

Might I also suggest you try using a more conciliatory tone, rather than jump right in attacking people, as you're likely to get more help that way as well.

Insulting the site you want help from is not the way to go about things.

 
plach
864313.  Sun Nov 13, 2011 9:55 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
I suggest when making fun about faith and makeing such statements about no census was taken at the birth of Jesus and the Bible was written 300 years after Christ you research your subjet before coming out with such inaccurate drivel


I suggest that you have joined a site of intelligent beings. Most of whom have read and studied about Christianity enough to debate many aspects of those beliefs with reason and sound scientific method.

And that you are starting out with a combative tone and a posting that is not a great example of accuracy or the careful use of language.

Gasp. Are you a troll trying to stir up trouble?

 
Jenny
864471.  Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:23 pm Reply with quote

I think this may be better placed in What Fresh Hell Is This, so I'm moving the thread.

 
PDR
864474.  Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:26 pm Reply with quote

deehethe wrote:
I suggest when making fun about faith and makeing such statements about no census was taken at the birth of Jesus and the Bible was written 300 years after Christ you research your subjet before coming out with such inaccurate drivel


WHo did, and when?

PDR

 
soup
864596.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:29 am Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
deehethe wrote:
I suggest when making fun about faith and makeing such statements about no census was taken at the birth of Jesus and the Bible was written 300 years after Christ you research your subjet before coming out with such inaccurate drivel

WHo did, and when?


QI series I episode 10 (Inland revenue).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWzBUnFPGdI&feature=related
4'40" - 8'50
It's Sandi who mentions the 300 years thing at about 7'40"

 
Neotenic
864599.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:14 am Reply with quote

I understand that whilst some of the individual books of the Bible existed beforehand, it is certainly correct to say that the Bible was not compiled into a format we would recognise today until a good 300 years after Christ - and approved at the gloriously named Synod of Hippo in 393.

I assume that a Catholic Encyclopedia is a reasonable enough source, yes?

 
exnihilo
864600.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:35 am Reply with quote

Some of them, indeed, existed as an entirely other book or books for many centuries until some other bits were crudely stitched on to the end.

 
masterfroggy
864609.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:28 am Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
I understand that whilst some of the individual books of the Bible existed beforehand, it is certainly correct to say that the Bible was not compiled into a format we would recognise today until a good 300 years after Christ - and approved at the gloriously named Synod of Hippo in 393.

I assume that a Catholic Encyclopedia is a reasonable enough source, yes?
There are no records of what happened at the first council of Bishops at the Synod of Hippo Regius, the only reason we know that anything happened there, was because there was a brief reading at the end of the (third) council of Carthage of that that had been agreed at the first Synod. Even that was opinions recorded from five years earlier, stating that ‘it’ the council of bishops, approved of the list drawn up, the 'approved canon', and the council of Carthage agreed to them but only if Rome agreed.

 
Zebra57
864621.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:31 am Reply with quote

One Gospel which failed to make the final selection was the Gospel According to Thomas.

In the Middle Ages for a person to support a non-orthodox scripture would almost certainly brought a charge of heresy. The Roman Catholic Church was unforgiving of alternative religious views.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

 
PDR
864628.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:58 am Reply with quote

Well the Gospel according to Sandi seems to be getting similar attention even today...

PDR

 
soup
864631.  Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:07 am Reply with quote

Zebra57 wrote:
One Gospel which failed to make the final selection was the Gospel According to Thomas.


As mentioned on a certain QI.

"'Moan Jesus the dragon tamer"!

 
Bondee
864960.  Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:29 pm Reply with quote

Zebra57 wrote:
One Gospel which failed to make the final selection was the Gospel According to Thomas.


Are you sure about that?
; )

 

Page 1 of 6
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group