The rapid expansion of the Christian Church prior to Constantine, against all forces of man and devils, is an empirical fact of history that cannot be denied and only awkwardly accounted for by the materialist unbelievers.
The explanations I have heard by naysayers along the way are absolute absurdity.
AND... why couldn't Julian the Apostate pull off the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple, (to spite the Christians?)
There was no real Christian Church prior to Constantine. There were a lot of Christian sects but no official Church. Constantine formed the official Roman Christan Church and some might say the Christian religion.
But that aside just because a lot of sheeple are willing to follow men and believe in the writing of men doesn't mean the "religion" is the right religion.
I don't know where you learned about the church but somebody fed you a pile of crap
Jews didn't crucify Jesus. It was a group of Jews who charge him with a crime and the Romans who killed him. You are an insane person full of hate.
The Muslim religion is a religion of war. The big Mo told his followers to spread the faith through the sword of conquest and thats what they did for a thousand of years. The terrorist are the true Muslims and the "peaceful" Muslims are apostates.
Someday every man will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Amen, regardless of what they think they will do.
Amen. Jesus is Lord.
Yup. In the end everyone will bow before him. Some will be overwhelmed with joy. The rest will be overwhelmed with dread. He is our Lord whether you believe in him or not. Not believing doesn't make him go away.
βIn a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.β β George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
At the time it appeared and for centuries afterwards, Islam was considered as nothing more than a Christian heresy. It was nothing more than a development of the well known Arian heresy.
And really, that isn't surprising. When the Arians were officially suppressed most of them were exiled and some, obviously, fled to Arabia. Likewise, there were plenty of Jews and Christians living in the area as well. Mohammed, as a trader, had plenty of opportunity to come into contact with them and learn about them. Being illiterate, his understanding was somewhat skewed and influenced by what he was told instead of Scripture. There were also allegations at the time that he had come under the tutelage of an Arian monk.
Islam claims, and even more so in those early days, to be merely a perfection of the Word of God. It claims that Jesus was a divine prophet, but that his message was perverted by those who came after, namely Paul, and that it was necessary for Mohammed to come and perfect it. It claims that the Jews desired to crucify Jesus but that God spirited him away and took him to heaven and that the Jews crucified his ghost instead. It claims that Jesus will return in the end and proclaim that he was merely a man and submit himself to the jurisdiction and lordship of the Mahdi.
But anyway, the idea that there is no Trinity and that Jesus was a created being instead of God himself, is straight out of the Arian heresies that began to spring up shortly after the time of Christ. And Islam was considered a Christian heresy right up through the Middle Ages.
Someday every man will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Amen, regardless of what they think they will do.
Amen. Jesus is Lord.
Yup. In the end everyone will bow before him. Some will be overwhelmed with joy. The rest will be overwhelmed with dread. He is our Lord whether you believe in him or not. Not believing doesn't make him go away.
Yup. I imagine Santa Claus, Bigfoot, and Jihad will be with us for a while longer as well.
In the beginning the world was without form. So the creator, being Italian, shaped the world into the shape of a meatball. Which is holy scripture of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monsters.
At the time it appeared and for centuries afterwards, Islam was considered as nothing more than a Christian heresy. It was nothing more than a development of the well known Arian heresy.
And really, that isn't surprising. When the Arians were officially suppressed most of them were exiled and some, obviously, fled to Arabia. Likewise, there were plenty of Jews and Christians living in the area as well. Mohammed, as a trader, had plenty of opportunity to come into contact with them and learn about them. Being illiterate, his understanding was somewhat skewed and influenced by what he was told instead of Scripture. There were also allegations at the time that he had come under the tutelage of an Arian monk.
Islam claims, and even more so in those early days, to be merely a perfection of the Word of God. It claims that Jesus was a divine prophet, but that his message was perverted by those who came after, namely Paul, and that it was necessary for Mohammed to come and perfect it. It claims that the Jews desired to crucify Jesus but that God spirited him away and took him to heaven and that the Jews crucified his ghost instead. It claims that Jesus will return in the end and proclaim that he was merely a man and submit himself to the jurisdiction and lordship of the Mahdi.
But anyway, the idea that there is no Trinity and that Jesus was a created being instead of God himself, is straight out of the Arian heresies that began to spring up shortly after the time of Christ. And Islam was considered a Christian heresy right up through the Middle Ages.
Another angle is that Mohammed was an Arab. They have been troublesome ever since Abraham fathered the first one and unless I'm mistaken, the Bible foretold that they would be.
Other than Flavius Josephus there is no mention of Jesus in any other written Roman history documents of the time period. Jesus was a minor Jewish rebel nothing more and nothing less. The mythology of Jesus and the religion of Christianity like ALL religions was created out of whole cloth by man.
Quote
And the passage in Flavius was a forgery.
Either Jesus was a man of history or not. Either he was crucified or not. Sounds like the skeptics cannot agree among themselves. First Jesus is only recorded by Josephus and then another skeptic says that passage is spurious -- meaning there is no record at all. So which is it--is Jesus a man of history or not?
Celsus was a contemporary antagonist of early Christianity but he never disputed Jesus' existence or crucifixion--he only disputed the deity of Christ. The pagan emperor Julian wanted to take Rome back to its pagan roots and he derogatorily referred to Christians as Galileans. He never disputed the historicity of Jesus, he only contended that a Jewish carpenter could never be a god. Those critics had access to far more information of their times than we do. They could have investigated the Roman census and criminal records of Palestine. Their antagonism was based on their belief that this mere man Jesus was not divine, it was not based on the belief that He never existed or was never crucified.
Suetonias and Tacitus also speak of Christ.
Most skeptics I have dialogued with have a very minimal or selective understanding of early AD history. Skepticism concerning the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is largely based on historical ignorance or refusal to accept the historical evidence.
In their teachings, I don't believe either hate Jesus. They just don't believe he's the Savior.
It's all non mooslimbs that mooslimbs hate.
Do you really believe this? Jews rather had a murderer pardoned than Jesus released. I've yet to see a single Muslim remove our Christian God from our government. Jews, including Hugo Black, have been at the vanguard at transforming the USA in to a godless, secular nation.
While you're off runnin' scared of your Sharia Law nightmare, the reality of Talmudic Law is now controlling your life & you ain't got a clue of its subtle stranglehold on our country.
Who killed Jesus? Here's your answer:
Last edited by SansSouci; 01/05/15.
οΏ½If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.οΏ½ ***US President James Madison***
The real problems in the world are Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all Semite religions.
But most of the World's Jews are not related to Biblical Hebrews. They are Ashkenazi Jews, and they are not Semitic. Hence, they have no valid claim to Israel. However, they are adept at propaganda.
οΏ½If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.οΏ½ ***US President James Madison***
Other than Flavius Josephus there is no mention of Jesus in any other written Roman history documents of the time period. Jesus was a minor Jewish rebel nothing more and nothing less. The mythology of Jesus and the religion of Christianity like ALL religions was created out of whole cloth by man.
Quote
And the passage in Flavius was a forgery.
Either Jesus was a man of history or not. Either he was crucified or not. Sounds like the skeptics cannot agree among themselves. First Jesus is only recorded by Josephus and then another skeptic says that passage is spurious -- meaning there is no record at all. So which is it--is Jesus a man of history or not?
Celsus was a contemporary antagonist of early Christianity but he never disputed Jesus' existence or crucifixion--he only disputed the deity of Christ. The pagan emperor Julian wanted to take Rome back to its pagan roots and he derogatorily referred to Christians as Galileans. He never disputed the historicity of Jesus, he only contended that a Jewish carpenter could never be a god. Those critics had access to far more information of their times than we do. They could have investigated the Roman census and criminal records of Palestine. Their antagonism was based on their belief that this mere man Jesus was not divine, it was not based on the belief that He never existed or was never crucified.
Suetonias and Tacitus also speak of Christ.
Most skeptics I have dialogued with have a very minimal or selective understanding of early AD history. Skepticism concerning the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is largely based on historical ignorance or refusal to accept the historical evidence.
Christians refer to Judeo-Christian values because they accept the divine inspiration of the OT just like the Jews and recognize it as part of the canon of Scripture.
I don't think any of us can comparatively gauge the depth of any anti-Christians group's potential hatred.
Our constitution is clearly based on Biblical morality even though it carefully avoids embracing the Christian faith. Even Thomas Jefferson said that Jesus gave the world the best system of morals that it has ever known. The attempts to tear down our constitution, whether by Jew, or Muslim, or liberal, are largely based the on rejection of the moral foundation which made us who we are. If Biblical morality is completely destroyed in our system of Government, our constitution will also fall and we will no longer be the America conceived by the Founders. Has anyone ever considered why the 10 commandments were originally placed in many courtrooms before they were removed? Did we evaluate what the impact will be on our nation by representatively destroying that morality. All law is based upon some morality. When that morality is destroyed, the laws will either change or be reinterpreted.
![[Linked Image from ]]( https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Trump-Tweet-Image-Im-Just-in-the-Way-e1577149651503.jpg)
