Re: Do we have non Eusebian evidence that there were Christian Churches prior to 312?

mountain man wrote:
"Martin Edwards" <big_mart_98@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dkip8s$qrh$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Roger Pearse wrote:

mountain man wrote:


Next time you'll leave me alone in alt.surfing and
cease and desist with your evangelical

"Roger Pearse" <roger_pearse@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1131133978.910974.278680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


mountain man wrote:


"Roger Pearse" <roger_pearse@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1130614955.514702.233290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


mountain man wrote:


This is Eusebian evidence, as it has been compiled and
preserved by Eusebius directly. To repeat above, that
any of these churches were christian is presumed from
[exclusively] the output of the desk of Eusebius of
Caesara.


I'm afraid that this theory -- for which there is no evidence -- is
bending your mind.


The theory is simple - christianity did not exist prior to
Constantine, the Arian controversy was a result of
opposition to the Constantine agenda by the pagans.

To refute this theory you only have to find one little bit of
evidence which is independent of the "resources" of Eusebius
of Caesara which suggests there was anyone called "christians"
in the history of the planet prior to the arrival of Constantine
in Rome.

Good luck. 

It seems that you haven't tried to find out whether any of this is
true: instead you claim that the rest of us must prove you wrong,
whatever you choose to assert.


If you had not descended on the alt.surfing newsgroup
where I was obliviously minding my own business, and
made some scathing evangelical diatribe, I would not
indeed have followed all this though to the above conclusion.

But now, that is in the past, and unless someone can prove
otherwise (and not via Eusebius of Caesara) then I am happy
to hold the belief concerning christianity, that it started out as
a supreme imperial religion for the benefit of Constantine's
administation of his empire; and it started in 312 with his
arrival in Rome.

This history makes alot more sense.  There were no
christian persecutions prior to Constantine; there were
no christians prior to Constantine.  It was the christians
who in fact did much persecution in the era starting 325.

This history is derived from considerable research and
is capable of being refuted, but I do not expect it to be.
I am reasonably confident that history happened according
to my analysis above, and for quite a number of reasons.



I think all of this is a really rather good illustration of why atheism
is a tiny minority of cranks.  How very, truly, pathetic.

All the best,

Roger Pearse


That is very spurious reasoning. 



It is not to be classified as reasoning, but simply the making
of assumptions, namely that my philosophy is atheistic.



I agree that his posts are tripe, but 



It is all very well to claim these posts as tripe, but you have
not provided any reasoning for your negative assessment,
neither have you provided any evidence to refute the hypothetical
claim in the subject line.




Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au





There is loads of the stuff you ask for, I have quoted some, you are posting tripe.

--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause - Chico Marx

www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Logical analysis of a Eusebian Fiction Postulate is found consistent with history!
    ... The conversion of Constantine is another fiction, ... and the persecution of christians. ... Eusebius via the sponsorship of Constantine had supreme imperial ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Do we have non Eusebian evidence that there were Christian Churches prior to 312?
    ... >> mountain man wrote: ... >>> opposition to the Constantine agenda by the pagans. ... > This history makes alot more sense. ... > no christians prior to Constantine. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Do we have non Eusebian evidence that there were Christian Churches prior to 312?
    ... that any of these churches were christian is presumed from the output of the desk of Eusebius of Caesara. ... Constantine, the Arian controversy was a result of opposition to the Constantine agenda by the pagans. ... evidence which is independent of the "resources" of Eusebius of Caesara which suggests there was anyone called "christians" in the history of the planet prior to the arrival of Constantine in Rome. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: funny creationsist
    ... >>> Paul met Jesus only through magic thoughts beamed into his head. ... > Josephus mentions Jesus twice. ... > there were Christians around who called Jesus the Christ. ... > before Eusebius quotes it... ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: funny creationsist
    ... >> Paul met Jesus only through magic thoughts beamed into his head. ... Josephus mentions Jesus twice. ... there were Christians around who called Jesus the Christ. ... before Eusebius quotes it... ...
    (talk.origins)