Comments on: Christianity – Makes Perfect Sense

By: tiki god

tiki god — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:51:40 +0000

religion is for the weak of mind, no doubt about it.

By: nyokki

nyokki — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:33:37 +0000

@Caio
I’m sure you’re right. That does not excuse your behavior.

By: Caio

Caio — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:46:58 +0000

Athanasius, typo.

By: Caio

Caio — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:41:30 +0000

No, he didn’t. Constantine was barely interested in theology except that he supported Anathasius and called councils at his, and his mother’s request. I’m telling you: the New Testament reached it’s present form before he was born.

I think you are confusing the fact that the Bible was a Greco-Roman (as opposed to) creation with the influence of Constantine.

Where are you getting this from? Socrates he Historian? Sozomen? Eusebius? I’ve read them all, mainly in the Greek, and have found no reason to think what you’re saying is true. On the other hand, Iranaeus’ picture of the Bible fairly closely reflects the modern one.

And yes, I am always disgusted when people spread historical mistruths.

By: nyokki

nyokki — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:38:59 +0000

@Caio
I think you misread my post or I haven’t made myself clear. It was Constantine who directed that a bible (of sorts) be put together. I never said that the Gospels that finally ended up as the New Testament was new to Christians. I’m guessing that that the reason we got what we got is that it was probably already the belief of many at the time. I am not Christian and claim no major knowledge of the history of belief among Christians or any other religion, for that matter. There’s zero reason to attack me. I’m not sure what I said that would “disgust” you so much. Actually, other than being nasty to me, I don’t disagree w/ anything you wrote and I’m not sure where you think we disagree. I don’t argue for the sake of arguing; I don’t flame (mostly), so there’s no reason to berate me if you think I’m incorrect, or hell, even if you think I’m a deluded. Make your point and let me answer you.

By: Caio

Caio — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:23:58 +0000

Erg, ‘AD’ as well. I’m going to make a cup of coffee.

My point still fucking stands

By: Caio

Caio — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:08:37 +0000

*scholarship = textual analysis, sorry.

By: Caio

Caio — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:03:21 +0000

Alec, Nyoki, you two are very good at mixing bullshit with legitimate facts, so as to make your bullshit look more valid, it disgusts me.

Yes, many aspects of Christianity were standardized by the Council of Nicaea, but go read yourself some Iranaeus: You’ll find that all of the basics of Orothodox/Catholic Christianity were established by that time (second century – he died over 100 years before Constantine). You’ll also find that his version of the New Testament is about the same as what you’ll find now.

I’m willing to bet – and I have read the New Testament carefully in Koine, and am familiar with the issues behind its scholarship – that the last gospel was completed no later than 100 AC, probably a bit earlier. Revelations probably wasn’t too much later.

By: gor

gor — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 00:49:12 +0000

I can relate Kidy, but I always felt better after shooting at muslims. This method of insulting others of different faiths on the internets is not as satisfying, but it’s better than doing nothing at all, I guess.

By: nyokki

nyokki — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 00:30:12 +0000

The New testament is a compilation of approved theology put together at the behest of Emperor Constantine in the 4th century to consolidate and bring together a single Christian theology. As Hepathos said, Christianity was invented/created by the Romans. Prior to this, there was no bible. There were probably hundreds of Christian/Jewish sects and the in-fighting was incredible. So much so, that non-Christians weren’t concerned by christianity, saying they were going to kill each other off w/out any help from w/out.