Apologist Needed

[Nathan]

I'm in a little discussion over at B-Independent.com -- a movie board I frequent -- and, if at all possible, I would like a skilled apologist here to register and join in. An individual, an atheistic filmmaker who goes by the handle of "masterzebub" and is the director of a film called (no joke) JESUS CHRIST: SERIAL RAPIST, is claiming these "facts": That the Church forged writings into the histories of Josephus (and later admitted to doing so), that the writing of the Latin Vulgate was ordered by a Roman emperor (hence, he says, the total lack of criticism of Rome in the New Testament), and that Christianity was invented by King Herod (the man, he says, who came up with the idea of the "door-to-door" Christian and making money from new converts) and refined by Constantine, who put the "Roman" in "Roman Catholic."

Would anyone care to help? You would have to resister on the board; the topic is in the General section at the top and is the title of the film.

Thank you.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Is the guy serious? Those are some of the most asinine statements I've ever heard. I think he may need a psycho-therapist more than an apologist. I'm not joking.

[Nathan]

I know. The problem I have (and this isn't the first time this guy has done this) is that he has presented this lunacy as factual to the entire board. Now, there are a number of Christians on the board, but no one has ever rebutted him. I would, but I am no apologist; I'm just learning the faith.

Can you help?

[Laudate_Dominum]

does he actually present arguments that can be engaged directly? I mean I could go around making up crazy things, but I would bear the burden of proof. If he doesn't present proof then he is making worthless statements.
If I were to say that Christianity was invented by Pontius Pilate, but didn't present anything in support of my claims I would not expect anything more than to be laughed off as a moron.
The statements you shared seem to be in this category.

[quote]That the Church forged writings into the histories of Josephus (and later admitted to doing so)[/quote]
Without at least some sort of evidence this statement is worthless. If he presented some basis for this assertion you could engage his "evidence", otherwise the burden of proof is on him. In any case, considering the nature of the writings of Josephus, this is absurd. As if the early Church would or even could falsify the records of Jewish historians. And why would they? It is not like the historical existence of Jesus was something that was under attack back then and that the Church, whatever that means, would be compelled to tamper with the writings of Jewish historians.. It's just such an idiotic idea.

[quote]that the writing of the Latin Vulgate was ordered by a Roman emperor (hence, he says, the total lack of criticism of Rome in the New Testament)[/quote]
First of all there is no such thing as the "writing" of the Latin Vulgate. It is a translation not an original composition. And there were other translations of the Bible before the Vulgate version. The record of earlier manuscripts in the Latin tradition, Greek versions of the NT writings, and extensive quotations in early writings from the New Testament prior to the Vulgate translation, make it quite clear that this assertion, namely that the Vulgate translation is somehow the Bible tweaked out to reflect an agenda, is utterly stupid and ignorant.

[quote]and that Christianity was invented by King Herod[/quote]
This guy is starting to seem like the Jack Chick of atheists. I'd like to see some evidence for that!! My goodness!! *shakes head*
That's almost as absurd as saying that Christianity was invented by Dolph Lundgren.
[quote](the man, he says, who came up with the idea of the "door-to-door" Christian and making money from new converts)[/quote]
Oh yeah, Herod really made money from Christianity. The door-to-door Christian is a modern concept. I have never seen or heard of anything even remotely scholarly that could possibly be the grounding of such an absurd statement.

[quote]and refined by Constantine, who put the "Roman" in "Roman Catholic."[/quote]
The use of the term "Roman Catholic" began in the 17th century and was originally used with derogatory connotations by protestants. The Oxford English Dictionary says as much.

[Nathan]

Thanks! This'll do just fine, my friend.

[phatcatholic]

you only need to respond w/ two words, bro:

"prove it"

basically, just repeat that mantra, he'll start dancing around like a moron, and you can basically just sit back and watch him do the work for ya.

[franciscanheart]

i like the mental picture your post displayed in my mind. (that was to phatty over there.)

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='hugheyforlife' date='Sep 4 2005, 08:51 PM']i like the mental picture your post displayed in my mind. (that was to phatty over there.)
[right][snapback]711017[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

"Phat phatty phatty phat phat phatty phatty phat phat!" -those twin girls from the Simpsons...although, probably using the term "fat fatty..."

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 5 2005, 10:25 AM']"Phat phatty phatty phat phat phatty phatty phat phat!" -those twin girls from the Simpsons...although, probably using the term "fat fatty..."
[right][snapback]711811[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
hehe, wow