Comment

Comment on Is there any real physical proof that Jesus christ ever existed?

Physical proof? No. But if that’s the criterion for proof that someone existed, then that mean 90% of historical figures can’t be proven to have existed. We don’t have the remains of Alexander the Great or any artefacts we can be sure are his. We have no remnants of Plato, none of his original writings remain.

Did a person name Jesus live sometime during the first century AD? Scholars are fairly certain of that. We do have textual evidence other than the bible that points to his existence.

It is highly unlikely that he was anything like the person written about in the bible. He was likely one of many radical apocalyptic prophets of the time.

We don’t have too many details about his life but because of something called the criterion of embarrassment we have good reason to believe he was baptized by a man named John the Baptist and was later crucified. (i.e. most burgeoning religions seeking legitimacy don’t typically invent stories that are embarrassing to their deity)

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

source

Sort:hotnew top

KneeTitts@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

then that mean 90% of historical figures can’t be proven to have existed

Well for most of those we tend to use independent verification for their existence. And in the case of jesus, we have literally zero independent verification.

source
- aidan@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  And in the case of jesus, we have literally zero independent verification.
  
  en.wikipedia.org/…/Sources_for_the_historicity_of…
  
  source
  - KneeTitts@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    While early scholars considered the Testimonium to be a total forgery, the majority of modern scholars consider it partially authentic, despite some clear Christian interpolations in the text
    
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
    
    source
    aidan@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    Even assuming the passage is totally genuine, two fires had destroyed much in the way of official documents Tacitus had to work with and it is unlikely that he would sift through what he did have to find the record of an obscure crucifixion
    
    Why? If it was a popular myth, why assume he wouldn’t try to confirm/deny it
    
    According to Bart Ehrman, Josephus’ passage about Jesus was altered by a Christian scribe, including the reference to Jesus as the Messiah
    
    So? I’m not presenting evidence for him being a Messiah. I am saying there is some independent evidence of him existing.
    
    B. The second line in Tacitus that mentions Christ and his death was never noticed until after the mid-fourth century. So this second line is fake.
    
    I agree that is bizarre, but not proof of it being fake. Though should be taken with a grain of salt.
    
    This is why Bart Ehrman specifically dismisses Tacitus and Josephus. As do most other biblical scholars.
    
    Who is Bart Ehrman and why relay his beliefs rather than speak for yourself?
    
    source
- Shard@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  If you mean Jesus as described word for word in the bible? Yes you are right. Such a mythical figure never existed.
  
  A man name Jesus from the first century AD? Who preached in the Levant? Who was baptized by a man named John and was later crucified? There is good enough evidence of such a person existing.
  
  I see you are familiar with Bart Ehrman, Even he doesn’t dispute that a historical Jesus existed.
  
  youtu.be/43mDuIN5-ww
  
  Here’s an even deeper dive from Bart Ehrman.
  
  youtu.be/4CD5DwrgWJ4
  
  source
darthskull@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

We do have textual evidence other than the bible that points to his existence.

Idk why you would need textual evidence besides the Bible to be certain the guy existed. It’s not like these are magical books that sprung from the earth. They have historical reasons for existing and the most likely reason includes the existence of the dude.

source