Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SonikJesus
Jesus started no church. It was started after his death by people who thought his teachings should be "codified into a set of religious rules."
|
That is simply not true. As again, Jesus strictly speaking is not a historical figure. THERE IS QUITE LITERALLY ZERO PRIMARY SOURCE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT JESUS CHRIST EVER EVEN EXISTED. There is no scientific, archaeological, or any other such evidence to suggest Jesus ever existed as a person. That is, aside from the Scriptural and Patristic writings of the organized, institutional Catholic/Orthodox Church. THERE IS LEGITIMATE, SCIENTIFIC, and ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ROME AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN EGYPT AND SYRIA HAS CONTINUOUSLY EXISTED SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE SECOND CENTURY. End of story. Such are the facts. Jesus is strictly a matter of Faith. To argue about him as a historical figure aside from the Church is silly, its like arguing about a fictional character in an epic novel and taking it too seriously. So SonikJesus and Rob, I will reiterate sans caps, the Church is at the least an 1900 year old continuous institution, and Christianity from its earliest evidence supported beginnings is a rigourously centralized, organized, religion.
Y'all don't have to believe in Jesus or the Church as a religion, but the history of the Church as an institution is legitimate and authenticated.
And a preemptive note to dead_battery, this is not preaching, this is a historical and literary discussion, surely you're intelligent enough to know the difference
