Are there any notable non-biblical christians in the 1st century?

The earliest back I've seen is the 2nd century (100-199 CE)

Which raises the question, why did it take 100 years for Jesus to be recognised?

Originally posted by lord xyz
The earliest back I've seen is the 2nd century (100-199 CE)

Which raises the question, why did it take 100 years for Jesus to be recognised?

Are you now denying Saint Paul's existence?

This is just too good.

You know nothing about how the Bible was made or how the historical community feel about it do you?

Originally posted by lord xyz
The earliest back I've seen is the 2nd century (100-199 CE)

Which raises the question, why did it take 100 years for Jesus to be recognised?

Great Fire of Rome. Nero said Christians caused it.

Which raises the question: are you trying to look stupid?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Are you now denying Saint Paul's existence?

This is just too good.

You know nothing about how the Bible was made or how the historical community feel about it do you?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Great Fire of Rome. Nero said Christians caused it.

Which raises the question: are you trying to look stupid?

Since you clearly didn't name anyone.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Isn't St. Paul in the Bible?

Nope. No mention of people being Saints in the Bible. Paul was there, though.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Are you?

Since you clearly didn't name anyone.

You asked two questions. The second I refuted with ten seconds of searching, having an answer to it made your first question pointless unless you're actually interested in prominent first century Christians (which I seriously doubt).

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Nope. No mention of people being Saints in the Bible. Paul was there, though.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You asked two questions.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The second I refuted with ten seconds of searching, having an answer to it made your first question pointless unless you're actually interested in prominent first century Christians (which I seriously doubt).

Originally posted by lord xyz
Since you clearly didn't name anyone.

Eh, he was recognized before that. The Apostles and such, if we're to strictly believe Biblical history. It just wasn't made into a publicly practiced religion until a century or two after Jesus. Which throws into question all kinds of details about the origin and stories associated with Jesus, but isn't damning in and of itself...most major religions don't spring into life immediately anyway.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Eh, he was recognized before that. The Apostles and such, if we're to strictly believe Biblical history. It just wasn't made into a publicly practiced religion until a century or two after Jesus. Which throws into question all kinds of details about the origin and stories associated with Jesus, but isn't damning in and of itself...most major religions don't spring into life immediately anyway.

If Jesus was real, believers of Jesus would've been recorded as far back as the first century, yet, there aren't any.

I've heard that the Bible was wrote at around 1/200 years after as well.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Thank you for being perdantic.

You're welcome.

Thank you for misspelling pedantic. It makes my point about your intelligence so much clearer for everyone else.

Originally posted by lord xyz
You didn't refute anything.

Yes I did. It's fairly hard to blame something on someone you've never heard of. In the 1st century Christians were blamed for starting the Great Fire of Rome. Thus Christians must have existed to blame in the first century.

Don't be silly, Sym. It was just a little typo. He obviously meant predantic, as opposed to postdantic. Duh.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Don't be silly, Sym. It was just a little typo. He obviously meant predantic, as opposed to postdantic. Duh.

B-but "dantic" isn't a root word. You c-cant and prefixes and postfixes is it like that.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're welcome.

Thank you for misspelling pedantic. It makes my point about your intelligence so much clearer for everyone else.

Yes I did. It's fairly hard to blame something on someone you've never heard of. In the 1st century Christians were blamed for starting the Great Fire of Rome. Thus Christians must have existed to blame in the first century.

He could just blame them for the sake of blaming them and only assume Christians existed in the first century by the assumption that Jesus was born in the first century.

It's not really notable, is it?

By looking, I think it's logical to say there were religious cults in the first century.

My point was it was apparant that the story was made up, by the fact that there's no evidence of the stories existing until 100 years after.

Marius wanted me to lay down my agenda.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Perfect, pernickety etc, it's an honest mistake.

He could just blame them for the sake of blaming them and only assume Christians existed in the first century by the assumption that Jesus was born in the first century.

It's not really notable, is it?

Considering they went out and persecuted Christians . . . considering they were a recognized group for him to accuse . . .

Seriously, if you don't want to believe in Jesus do what everyone who thinks the same does, take it on faith.

Are there any notable non-biblical christians in the 1st century?

Originally posted by lord xyz
Perfect, pernickety etc, it's an honest mistake.

He could just blame them for the sake of blaming them and only assume Christians existed in the first century by the assumption that Jesus was born in the first century.

It's not really notable, is it?

I'm sorry, are you saying Nero anticipated the rise of Christianity and so blamed the Christians for burning Rome even though they didn't exist?

Isn't that akin to the British claiming Australia two centuries before anyone in the west knew it was there?

Your being completely ignorant...but at the same time quite clever.

The first century goes from the year 1 to the year 100. Now all the Christians at this time were very prominent and they still are they include: Jesus, St. Peter, St. Andrew, St. Matthew, St. John, St. Luke, St. Mary, St. Joseph, St. Paul and many many others. However, because the Christian communities took these peoples writings and formed them into Scripture you have found yourself a way of excluding them from a list- you don't want Christians who have been written about, you want ones who have not been written about but are still prominent?

However, luckily some of us aren't as stupid as you are.

Pope St. Clement (Died circa AD 99, became Pope in AD 88)
St. Ignatius of Antioch. (Born AD 35 died AD 117)
Saint Polycarp. (Born AD 69 died AD 155)

Three very prominent Church Fathers from the 1st century who did not get a mention in the Bible.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I'm sorry, are you saying Nero anticipated the rise of Christianity and so blamed the Christians for burning Rome even though they didn't exist?

Isn't that akin to the British claiming Australia two centuries before anyone in the west knew it was there?

Your being completely ignorant...but at the same time quite clever.

The first century goes from the year 1 to the year 100. Now all the Christians at this time were very prominent and they still are they include: Jesus, St. Peter, St. Andrew, St. Matthew, St. John, St. Luke, St. Mary, St. Joseph, St. Paul and many many others. However, because the Christian communities took these peoples writings and formed them into Scripture you have found yourself a way of excluding them from a list- you don't want Christians who have been written about, you want ones who have not been written about but are still prominent?

However, luckily some of us aren't as stupid as you are.

Pope St. Clement of Rome.
St. Ignatius of Antioch.
Saint Polycarp.

Three very prominent Church Fathers from the 1st century who did not get a mention in the Bible.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I'm sorry, are you saying Nero anticipated the rise of Christianity and so blamed the Christians for burning Rome even though they didn't exist?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Isn't that akin to the British claiming Australia two centuries before anyone in the west knew it was there?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Your being completely ignorant...but at the same time quite clever.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
The first century goes from the year 1 to the year 100.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Now all the Christians at this time were very prominent and they still are they include: Jesus, St. Peter, St. Andrew, St. Matthew, St. John, St. Luke, St. Mary, St. Joseph, St. Paul and many many others. However, because the Christian communities took these peoples writings and formed them into Scripture you have found yourself a way of excluding them from a list- you don't want Christians who have been written about, you want ones who have not been written about but are still prominent?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
However, luckily some of us aren't as stupid as you are.

Pope St. Clement (Died circa AD 99, became Pope in AD 88)
St. Ignatius of Antioch. (Born AD 35 died AD 117)
Saint Polycarp. (Born AD 69 died AD 155)

Three very prominent Church Fathers from the 1st century who did not get a mention in the Bible.

Fair enough.

One question still remains that I forgot to include in my first post:

Did any of them follow the Bible?

Originally posted by lord xyz
One question still remains that I forgot to include in my first post:

Did any of them follow the Bible?

They couldn't, the modern Bible was not specified until the 4th century.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
They couldn't, the modern Bible was not specified until the 4th century.