I worked on Star Wars over twenty years before it was known by that name. That does not mean that I did not work on Satr Wars.

The village of what came to be called Nazareth existed at the time of Christ. When the New Testament authors wrote their books some hundred or so years after the time of Christ, the village had the name of Nazareth.

It seems to me that a rational approach to negating the existence of Christ should not be pinned on such meager data. It's like a house of cards built on Nazareth.

To say that a bunch of Jews made the whole thing up out of nothing is another one of the cards. In my opinion it is quite likely that a historical figure that came to be known as Christ did exist. But that his historical attributes changed over periods of time. History was rewritten. Certainly in the first 100 years after Christ. But also since then.

It's easy to see that history has been rewritten since then since the New Testament records the thinking at about 100-200 AD, and we can compare that to the present thinking in the church.

• Nazareth is a good point to concentrate on - johnpowell - April 4, 2001 - 21:36 UTC
• Jesus of ___ , sure, but Jesus of Nazareth, no. - johnpowell - April 4, 2001 - 21:53 UTC
  • Response - yanniru - April 5, 2001 - 12:04 UTC
    • Don't trust people who talk with the dead - johnpowell - April 5, 2001 - 21:07 UTC
      • It's more important not to trust the dead people that talk to yo - yanniru - April 6, 2001 - 12:57 UTC
        • Listen to the angel/devil on your shoulder - johnpowell - April 6, 2001 - 16:27 UTC
    • 99% and 1% are convenient - johnpowell - April 5, 2001 - 21:09 UTC