The guy we refer to as Jesus was likely a real person. Probably named something like Yeshua (same root as the name Joshua), who probably was baptized by John the Baptist and probably was crucified. Everything else ranges from contested to myth.
That is not necessarily true, there are scarce but nonbiblical references to Jesus. Such as the execution of James described in Antiquities references him as “the Brother of Jesus, the one they call Messiah”.
I’m hardcore atheist myself, but you are damn right Jesus The Christ is a fabrication like Santa Claus. I’m just saying there is nuance.
Also interesting note is Rome loved crucifiying people for Sedition.
Turns out walking around saying you’re the King of The Jews isn’t cool with the Roman nobility, and guess what he wasn’t the first it to do it either. They crucified someone around 4BCE for the exact same thing
The last I knew, the best evidence against Jesus the Christ being real was the distinct lack of recording by any contemporary Roman writings. But I may be remembering wrong.
You can’t disprove a negative. You can keep “demanding” me to all you want, but it’s not how things work.
What’s the evidence you have?
All of the notes for Josephus on wikipedia are from people that were either associated with the church or wrote non-fiction books about religious leaders.
Take that as you will. I understand Faith is a strong thing, but evidence and science is how the world actually works.
You’re rejecting evidence you haven’t even read about, so yes. You get the burden of proof for now. You’re making an assumption that every academic who says “there’s enough evidence to suggest this person existed just not exactly how it’s laid out in the bible” is some religious zealot. Show us proof.
I’m not going to link to a bunch of different papers for you since you can’t be bothered to Google before you comment so here’s a Wikipedia article. If you’re here in good faith you’ll know how to follow the sources and find the evidence, if not you’ll reply with some more idiotic denialism.
The guy we refer to as Jesus was likely a real person. Probably named something like Yeshua (same root as the name Joshua), who probably was baptized by John the Baptist and probably was crucified. Everything else ranges from contested to myth.
There is zero evidence Jesus, in any name variation, was real.
That is not necessarily true, there are scarce but nonbiblical references to Jesus. Such as the execution of James described in Antiquities references him as “the Brother of Jesus, the one they call Messiah”.
I’m hardcore atheist myself, but you are damn right Jesus The Christ is a fabrication like Santa Claus. I’m just saying there is nuance.
Also interesting note is Rome loved crucifiying people for Sedition.
Turns out walking around saying you’re the King of The Jews isn’t cool with the Roman nobility, and guess what he wasn’t the first it to do it either. They crucified someone around 4BCE for the exact same thing
Anthronges
The last I knew, the best evidence against Jesus the Christ being real was the distinct lack of recording by any contemporary Roman writings. But I may be remembering wrong.
Some hystorians and theologians would agree with you, but they’re in the minority of academics.
Yes, historians that are not connected to the church.
Well, if you have good evidence to disprove the majority of academics and blow the lid off a major conspiracy I would love to read your papers.
Because proving a negative is how things work now? What.
How about you prove he did exist, and not using “evidence” from a church affiliated “historian”.
How about you disprove the evidence we have instead of pulling shit out of your ass? Start with why you think Josephus accounts aren’t trustworthy.
You can’t disprove a negative. You can keep “demanding” me to all you want, but it’s not how things work.
What’s the evidence you have?
All of the notes for Josephus on wikipedia are from people that were either associated with the church or wrote non-fiction books about religious leaders.
Take that as you will. I understand Faith is a strong thing, but evidence and science is how the world actually works.
You’re rejecting evidence you haven’t even read about, so yes. You get the burden of proof for now. You’re making an assumption that every academic who says “there’s enough evidence to suggest this person existed just not exactly how it’s laid out in the bible” is some religious zealot. Show us proof.
What’s the evidence?
I’m not going to link to a bunch of different papers for you since you can’t be bothered to Google before you comment so here’s a Wikipedia article. If you’re here in good faith you’ll know how to follow the sources and find the evidence, if not you’ll reply with some more idiotic denialism.