What of Christianity is historical and what isnt?

[Tart]

There is a lot of dispute of the history of Christrianity, and whether or not it is a myth... Some people even believe it was invented by the Council of Nicaea in 300AD...

So what do you think? Of this timeline from Wikipedia, of Christianity. Where would you draw the line, from when Christianity went from a mytth to history...

What would be your guess for an estimation, of what percentage of this list is real and what percentage is myth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Christianity

[Tart]

What would be your guess for an estimation, of what percentage of this list is real and what percentage is myth?

I'd guess 2% versus 185%. Of course guesses are useless, but I gave you precisely what you asked for. Facts are what are important, but you didn't ask for any of those.

Facts?

So which ones specifically do you believe make up the 2%, you say are myths? On just a "guess"?

I didn't say that 2% are myths. You got it backwards.

You asked for a guess and I gave you one.

Oh you mean 2% is real history and the rest isnt?

I gave only two percentages. Given that your first application of those two percentages was wrong, how many other options do you think there could be?

I dont understand your question.

[For_The_Kingdom]

[Replying to post 19 by Tart]

Yes, there is good reasons to believe that.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 19 by Tart]

New Testament scholars no longer hold this as undisputed. It's a brave new world.
I think you should poke around consensus based information sources - Wiki, Encyclopedia Britannica, and so on. You'll find they all use the Bible as a source.

Belief in the resurrection was not widely accepted until 250 years later, when it was pushed by the Roman government.

No one asks why the government of Rome pushed such a thing. There is no way it believed, spontaneously after so much time.

Begging the question, what is historical about the events in the Bible, separate from the Bible being historic?

For example, you will now find Superman in any history book, but no Superman himself.

[marco]

[Replying to post 19 by Tart]

Yes, there is good reasons to believe that.

Moderator Comment

Avoid one liners that contribute nothing. You could have expanded upon those "good reasons."

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by Tart]

I oppose the entire OP because it asks for mere opinions. It does not ask for "reasons". Why shouldn't this OP be a "poll"?

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 19 by Tart]

New Testament scholars no longer hold this as undisputed. It's a brave new world.
I think you should poke around consensus based information sources - Wiki, Encyclopedia Britannica, and so on. You'll find they all use the Bible as a source.

Belief in the resurrection was not widely accepted until 250 years later, when it was pushed by the Roman government.

No one asks why the government of Rome pushed such a thing. There is no way it believed, spontaneously after so much time.

Begging the question, what is historical about the events in the Bible, separate from the Bible being historic?

For example, you will now find Superman in any history book, but no Superman himself.

Resurrection belief was seminal to Christianity, and initiated it as a separate group. We know this because Paul's letters attest to both his and the Jerusalem disciples' belief in the resurrection. Paul's earliest letter dates from CE 55. The resurrection was the primordial and primal tenet of Christianity, and it did not take 250 years before it was accepted in the Roman Empire.

Moreover, the Empire never "pushed" resurrection belief. On the contrary, it sought to suppress and eliminate scores of resurrection-believing Christians. The Gospels spitefully call Rome "the abomination of the desolation" and Christians had no truck with emperor worship, by refusing to sacrifice and burn incense to the emperor's "Genius", for which they were oppressed, imprisoned, exiled, and killed. Christians refused to serve in the imperial armies. The book of Revelation has nothing but scorn to heap upon Rome. The idea that Christianity was a product of Roman politicos who wanted to impose a "religion of peace" on the Empire is utterly false and historically inept.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 26 by steveb1]

Sources please, sources.
How does one come up with the idea that Rome tried to suppress Christianity, when it was the *wait for it* the Holy Roman Empire that spread it.
Does the Roman Catholic Church ring a bell?

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 26 by steveb1]

Sources please, sources.
How does one come up with the idea that Rome tried to suppress Christianity, when it was the *wait for it* the Holy Roman Empire that spread it.
Does the Roman Catholic Church ring a bell?

I oppose the entire OP because it asks for mere opinions. It does not ask for "reasons". Why shouldn't this OP be a "poll"?

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 26 by steveb1]

Sources please, sources.
How does one come up with the idea that Rome tried to suppress Christianity, when it was the *wait for it* the Holy Roman Empire that spread it.
Does the Roman Catholic Church ring a bell?

The Holy Roman Empire existed well after Christianity had flourished in Europe, and it had no connection to the ancient Roman Empire, which had fallen much earlier. To say that the Holy Roman Empire is equivalent to ancient Rome is just more of the same ahistorical line.

No one came up with the idea that "Rome tried to suppress Christianity". Rome IN FACT suppressed Christianity. Are you really so unfamiliar with the facts that you never heard of the Roman anti-Christian persecutions, the oppressive laws, the immolation of martyrs?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 29 by steveb1]

True - but I didn't name dates did I?
Rome accepted Christianity in 313, and then formalized it through the Empire.
I wish I had that kind of suppression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecuti ... and_extent