Jesus, the person, existed as far as academic consensus is concerned
because can you imagine what would happen to academics if academia decided jesus didn’t exist.
Comment on Entombed
Zombie@feddit.uk 2 days agoJesus, the person, existed as far as academic consensus is concerned.
Jesus, the son of God, on the other hand, only exists in the heads of the delusional.
The Christ myth theory, developed in 19th century scholarship and gaining popular attraction since the turn of the 20th century,[15][16][2] is the view that Jesus is purely a mythological figure[17] and that Christianity began with belief in such a figure.[18] Proponents use a three-fold argument developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value with respect to Jesus’s existence, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan or mythical roots.[19][20] The idea that Jesus was a purely mythical figure has a fringe status in scholarly circles and has had no support in critical studies for more than a century, with most such theories going without recognition or serious engagement.[21][2][note 4]
David Gullotta states that modern interest in mythicism has been “amplified by internet conspiracy culture, pseudoscience, and media sensationalism”.[16]
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 day ago
asdasd201@lemmygrad.ml 1 day ago
Wasn’t Joshua (aka Jesus) a rabbi?
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Yeah, the academic consensus of Christian theologians 🙄
Obviously true.
Or references to him form ANYONE who were alive at the same time he supposedly was, for that matter.
Also factually accurate.
Because guess what? The people who choose to dedicate their lives to studying theology or first century Palestine history tend to be people who believe in the myths. It’s inherent confirmation bias.
Next you’re going to tell me that it’s an undisputed fact that draconian punishment reduces crime rates, based on the testimony of cops and conservative demagogues 🙄
Zombie@feddit.uk 1 day ago
I recommend reading the Wikipedia page. It debunks your debunking quite thoroughly.
Christians aren’t the only people to have studied that time period.
Jesus was a man of near no economic means and no military power. The fact there’s even any historical references to him is a klaxon for his existence. I’m from an area of the world that has next to no written records for the entire peoples that lived here throughout several centuries of the early middle ages, and yet it’s not doubted they existed. It seems then pretty difficult to doubt the existence of a single man with which there’s so much written from an even earlier period.
If Jesus existed in modern times I’m sure there’d be conspiracies that the CIA is trying to wipe out the memory of the slave abolitionist and communist revolutionary. But because a cult of personality and religion got built around him for centuries, that is now one of the dominant philosophical and political powers in the world, the opposite view is taken. It’s all a conspiracy, maaaan!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
“He’s real because it was weird that someone made him up” 🙄
Yeah, those WILL leave traces beyond the written records. Where’s your archaeological proof of the significant carpenter?
Yeah, someone being written about a lot even though they’re not rich DOES prove that they’re real! Case in point:
Image
Nah, if he lived in modern day, he’d probably be murdered by the IOF, being a Palestinian from the West Bank.
Fixed it for you.
Bolded the operative words.
The myth have been kept alive not by being true, but by being a tool of domination for those who have and want to maintain power.
Or to quote Eleanor Ferguson, # “Christianity didn’t become a world religion because of quality of its teachings, but by the quantity of its violence”
Similarly, the Liberal Zionism-esque “compromise” of Jesus being real but not divine was established not from the preponderance of evidence or even reason, but from being overly trusting of biased authority figures.
A braggart known to exaggerate and embellish accounts to make himself and the Jewish people look good.
And he wasn’t born until the supposed Jesus had already died, making all the things he “reported” about it as an adult historian decades old hearsay at best.
As for Tacitus, that was one passage in 116 CE, a modern day lifespan after the events described where he gets names and titles wrong and doesn’t reference a source.
Hardly the irrefutable evidence you like to pretend it is.