4 ms·
What do you mean by "unvalidated"? There is a wide consensus among historians that Jesus existed and was an influential figure.
by tasuki 4y ago
What do you mean by "unvalidated"? There is a wide consensus among historians that Jesus existed and was an influential figure.
- soperj 4y agoSure, but that doesn't make him the son of god born to a virgin.
- melling 4y agoHe didn’t say that. We’re doing that thing where we make sharp turns into the weeds. “Yeah but…” The person simply claimed that he was a historical influential person. We’ve got another person complaining about America’s historical figures being “whitewashed “ How about we all be specific instead of making sweeping statements?
- gweinberg 4y agoWell, it's almost certainly true that there was somebody existed who could in a sense be referred to as the historical Jesus. But if he bore almost no resemblance to the Jesus of the Gospels, didn't say most of the sayings attributed to him, and wasn't named Jesus, it wouldn't necessarily be completely false to say "Jesus never existed".
- soperj 4y agoAccording to the Bible he says that he's the son of god a number of times.
- tgv 4y agoThat says more about historical consensus than about the existence of Jesus.
- bllguo 4y agoexactly what, pray tell, does it say about historical consensus?
- notahacker 4y agoThat most of the historians involved in studying that period and forming that consensus were Christians (or Muslims) before they started... There's no particular reason to believe that a historical Jesus-figure didn't exist, but the attestations to his existence are the New Testament, written some decades after he is believed to have existed (generally believed to be based on a single document which has been lost despite its obvious significance to early Christians), a couple of secular Roman references to him as the figure the Christian cult was centred on also written some decades later, and a couple of lines in Antiquities of the Jews whose wording varies greatly depending on which of the much later copies you read... On the one hand, that's more attestations to his existence than most of the people who lived in classical antiquity. On the other hand, we have plenty of references to the angel Moroni that Joseph Smith met from a wider variety of sources written within a few decades of the meeting supposedly taking place, and I'm still completely comfortable doubting that the angel Moroni was a real historical figure.
- bllguo 4y agocompiling an argument that Jesus did not exist seems like one of the most obvious routes to take for a nonbeliever seeking to discredit Abrahamic religions, so I hardly think the historicity of Jesus is something of interest only to religious historians. Not to mention the significance of Christianity in Roman history - or do you also claim little non-Christian representation among scholars of Rome? and your final comments seem like a disingenuous comparison when you yourself point out the difference in standards we have when talking about the existence of figures in ancient history vs. the 19th century
- root_axis 4y agoI don't think they're saying jesus didn't exist, hence "unvalidated", i.e. a real person but not the son of god who rose from the dead.
- gumby 4y agoThere is an english wikipedia article that makes that claim but that page cites commentary from religious people. As for contemporary influence, well, even the gospels point out that the people chose Barabas. Certainly an influential figure whether such a person actually existed or not.
- freeone3000 4y agoTacticus is religious, sure, but for the Roman state religion. He is primarily a military and political writer; his contemporaneous account of Jesus’ followers is in the context of the First Jewish-Roman War.
- gumby 4y agoHe's a secondary source since he was born a couple of decades after pilate left office and after tiberius was dead. Going back to the original point of this thread (and of the posted article): the efficacy of the biography is orthogonal to whether the subject existed or not.
- dskloet 4y agoThere are thousands of people called "Jesus". What exactly does it mean to say Jesus existed? Does James Bond exist?
- neurobama 4y agoYes, we even know where his possible father is buried: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Julius_Abdes_Pantera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Julius_Abdes_Pantera
- pmarreck 4y agoI took an entire class at Cornell called "The Search for the Historical Jesus." I think I can say with at least some minimum authority that the evidence that he existed is scant at best. Anyway, your comment is also missing the whole point of my comment: The idea of Jesus is powerful; it almost doesn't matter what his exact existence entailed.
- tasuki 4y ago> I think I can say with at least some minimum authority that the evidence that he existed is scant at best. I'm not a historian. There is a consensus among the vast majority of historians that Jesus existed, right? I suppose there could be consensus without evidence, is that the case? > Anyway, your comment is also missing the whole point of my comment Yes, that's why I asked you to explain: I was missing the point of your comment. > The idea of Jesus is powerful; it almost doesn't matter what his exact existence entailed. Sure.
- MichaelZuo 4y agoWell to be fair to the parent a 'consensus without evidence' is just an appeal to popularity.