Many first and second century Historians who were anti Christian have written about Christ. Some of them are Phlegon, Josephus and Tacitus.
Later interlineations don't count.
We possibly cannot be wrong with our measuring of time.
Even most Christians admit that we are wrong about BC and AD. Learn your own faith.
12/30/2008 4:27:01 PM
Why don't you blog? Here's why:
12/30/2008 4:36:42 PM
Argumentum ad calendar?
12/30/2008 4:54:21 PM
Why, oh why can't these fuckers learn anything about the history of their own religion?
12/30/2008 4:59:27 PM
The fact that the year is 1429 proves allah is real.
12/30/2008 5:19:09 PM
Seigi no Mikata
Exiguus got it wrong.
That's all I'll say.
12/30/2008 5:21:36 PM
Atheist In A Foxhole
Stupid twat. Reasonable blog site though.
12/30/2008 5:35:36 PM
Flowers for Algernon.
12/30/2008 5:37:56 PM
The only mentions of Christ in the writings of Josephus are both later interpolations.
12/30/2008 5:44:05 PM
One of those old popes was instrumental in linking the dynastic year-numbering system permanently to the estimated birth year of their favorite little Jebus. Ultimately, it's the Papist calendar.
12/30/2008 5:56:18 PM
And those anti-Christian historians back up the gospel stories, do they?
... Nope, they don't. And Dennis the Short doesn't count as proof of anything, idiot.
12/30/2008 6:21:10 PM
Darwin's Lil Girl
AD and BC came about later. As for the rest...
Citations really bloody needed.
12/30/2008 6:36:54 PM
Why are there no contemporary sources citing the existence of Christ, it seems like a no brainer.
12/30/2008 6:43:42 PM
I don't know about Phlegon or Tacitus, but we know the ownership records of Josephus' manuscripts: after he died, they were owned by Christians, and almost all the mentions of Jesus were not written by Josephus.
12/30/2008 6:57:21 PM
Maybe of Jesus Christ the man, but not the biblical one.
12/30/2008 7:01:48 PM
Is it worth trying to make a point here? I think not.
12/30/2008 7:27:16 PM
They spoke about a person who could have been the Jesus of the Gospels. That he's the son of God, it's a matter of faith. And concerning the dating system...................better not to tell you how the Greeks and the Romans counted.
12/30/2008 7:29:11 PM
A wrong as a wrong thing, with a postgraduate degree in being wrong from the university of wrong.
12/30/2008 8:38:13 PM
How do you explain Sumerian coins marked 3600 BC?
12/30/2008 9:07:27 PM
The AD/BC split isn't mentioned in the Bible, but its date was calculated using information taken from it; so it comes from the Bible, too.
12/30/2008 9:17:16 PM
a mind far far away
Citations seriously fucking needed. Also, you fail at history, both secular and religous.
12/30/2008 10:11:27 PM
One thing I'll never understand in many of the thousands of quotes on FSTDT and for which this is a prime example: Do these people not understand that it's 2008 and that you can actually fact-check their claims without even leaving your chair? It's not the 1960s anymore when you actually had to go to a library, or the middle ages when you had to be priviledged to access information.
Listen, "Wer", it's 2008 - if you claim something so abysmally stupid or wrong like you did in that post, people can and will find out in less than a minute, so read up about Josephus or Dionysius Exiguus first before you make any grand statements. Because you will only look like a pathetic retard to anyone with half a brain cell who knows how to use Google.
12/30/2008 10:18:53 PM
12/30/2008 11:19:21 PM
The entire dating method of BC(Before Christ) and AD(Anno Domini meaning the year of our Lord) wouldn’t have been there if Christ did not live during that time
Then why did that dating system have to be created years, if not centuries after the supposed death of your supposed "christ"
We possibly cannot be wrong with our measuring of time
We can if we're going to set completely arbitrary dates for
A) The supposed "creation" of the world.
B)The supposed birth of a "divine" being.
C)The supposed death of the aforementioned "divine" being.
Since all of these events have never been chronicled by any eyewitness (or even credible) sources and the placement of these events in the timeline have varied with religious ideology and interpretation it can be inferred that yes, our mesuring of time based off of supposed and quite likely non-existant events can be wrong.
12/30/2008 11:45:31 PM
Hey moron, the BC/AD thing was invented by a vertically challenged monk over 700 years after Jesus so-called birth - and he got the dates wrong anyway.
12/31/2008 1:43:05 AM