The inference being that if the calendar starts with the significant event of Jesus's death, and most of humanity appears to go along with it for a couple of millennia, then Jesus must have existed, right? I can understand the viewpoint, and I wouldn't call it irrelevant. But inerrant, scientifically rigorous proof? And therefore everyone should accept Jesus as lord and saviour? Uh...no, you're correct in assuming that would not be convincing.
Ah noooo. We were simply trying to establish/re-establish that Jesus did in fact exist. The other part you mention above is a faith matter. However as the Bible points out, many (hundreds) saw and talked to Jesus after His resurrection. Yes, I know you need more proof.
All this talk about calendars, and why we use the ones we do, reminds me of Humpty Dumpty from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, where he famously states: Much like Humpty Dumpty, we use the languages and calendars that we do because of who held power. If you had enough power, you could add a month and name it after yourself. Lose a major war, and your grandchildren speak a different language. Civilization is about power, and the control of it. Tom
That's funny as hell from a HellFire and Damnation Christian! ound: Not to mention a record of near record for a thanked post! :thumb:
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus]Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/historical-and-scientific-proof-of-jesus-faq.htm
Like the Caesars Julius and Augustus, who wanted the best months named after themselves. Ever wonder why OCTober is the tenth month? Now you know.