3 ms·
the historical record of someone named Jesus existing isn't debated by any historical scholar It is debated by people like Richard Carrier https://www.youtube.
by DemocracyFTW2 4y ago
the historical record of someone named Jesus existing isn't debated by any historical scholar
It is debated by people like Richard Carrier https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=mAEB&search_query=richard+carrier https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=mAEB&search_query=richard... who says that (IIRC) while it's not unlikely that one or several people with similar messages preached in Judea 2000 years ago, the Jesus of the Bible looks like a literary invention when you go back to all the earliest records in Christian and non-Christian (e.g. Roman) sources.
*Edit* now that I got downvoted for mentioning Richard Carrier I'd very much like to hear about substantialized criticism about his work. Any pointers?
- altthought 4y agoRichard Carrier is an extremely fringe figure regarding the historical Jesus. The overwhelming majority of scholars in the field from conservative to liberal historians dismiss his ideas as fringe, and his methodologies as inconclusive, at best.
- wl 4y agoRichard Carrier is a crank who somehow got popular among New Atheists who didn’t know any better. His work enjoys no support in academia.
- nyokodo 4y ago> It is debated by people like Richard Carrier Yes, but there’s little debate amongst scholars that aren’t atheist activists. For instance, it’s extremely difficult to explain the historical facts of the early Christian movement without a historical Jesus due to those events being so recent and broadly falsifiable via living memory let alone records extant at the time and there being no evidence of the Romans using a lack of historical evidence for Jesus as an argument against Christianity.