• andros_rex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Muhammad was a historical figure. That does not mean Islam is true. Jesus was also a historical figure, and that does not mean Christianity is true. It’s hard to proof that a random person from any historical time period existed, because most folks couldn’t read or write, but Jesus is independently attested in Josephus. We know that John the Baptist existed, we know that Pontius Pilate existed. I’m not sure how you have a “pile of evidence” that someone did not exist, it tends to be very difficult to prove a negative. :)

    If you walk into any mainstream research university, and talk to their religious studies department, the idea that Jesus didn’t exist is very fringe. That’s great the you did some passionate research in high school, but that is not enough to disprove the widely accepted academic consensus. This isn’t “argument from authority” - this is peer review. I don’t have the Greek or access to multiple manuscripts, so I have to rely on what they say - and the fact that academics are always looking to disprove each other and get published. The historiography of early Christianity has undergone massive changes since the 1940s. (This is true for historiography across the board - my interest primarily lies in Ancient China, and the debate there is whether the Xia dynasty existed or not)

    If you do want some academic support for a fictional Christ, you can try Richard Carrier or Bob Price (Price has a podcast!) Bob Price is absolutely insane but fun and he’s always very clear when he disagrees with consensus.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Jesus was also a historical figure,

      Prove it. Stop telling me what other people on JSTOR think, stop telling what your No True Scotsmen think, stop telling me how dumb I am, stop comparing me to other people. Back up your assertion with evidence.

      s hard to proof that a random person from any historical time period existed,

      Not my problem. You are making an assertion and it is not my fault that it is hard.

      because most folks couldn’t read or write,

      And?

      but Jesus is independently attested in Josephus

      He wrote his book series 40 years after the supposed events and the two passages that refer to Jesus are both forgeries. The first one is talking about a totally different James and the long one was expressing 2nd century Trinity ideas and gushes over Jesus in a way that no Orthodox Jewish person would.

      We know that John the Baptist existed, w

      Don’t care. He isn’t Jesus.

      we know that Pontius Pilate existed

      Don’t care. He isn’t Jesus. Stay on topic.

      m not sure how you have a “pile of evidence” that someone did not exist, it tends to be very difficult to prove a negative. :)

      Simple. No one can agree about the basic facts about him which is what you see when people are lying. Additionally even a minimum historical Jesus requires a precise sequence of events that involves multiple people doing unexpected things. On average people are average. Just for starters

      • Why didn’t Pilat kill the rest of the Ministry?
      • Where did the Ministry go after the events?
      • How did they end up in Jerusalem somehow thriving and oppressed at the same time?
      • Why did the Pharisee break their own rules about reporting Jews for non-violent crimes to the Romans?
      • Why did the Pharisees simply use their secret police as documented in the Talmud to deal with James and Jesus and co?
      • Why was Paul oppressing them to begin with and what was the nature of it?
      • How the hell does a movement, a reformed movement, a counter movement, and a counter-counter movement form in 6months to 3 years?
      • Why did Paul not go to the Jerusalem community after his experience?
      • How did Jesus, a man with nothing, convince 12 people to give up everything for him?

      You need to explain all this if you want your minimum historical Jesus and you can’t.

      If you walk into any mainstream research university, and talk to their religious studies department, the idea that Jesus didn’t exist is very fringe.

      Argument from authority, logical fallacy. Present your evidence.

      That’s great the you did some passionate research in high school,

      Personal attack. Present your evidence

      but that is not enough to disprove the widely accepted academic consensus.

      Argument from authority, logical fallacy. Present your evidence.

      This isn’t “argument from authority” - this is peer review.

      No. Peer review is the process where multiple experts review the work of other experts. What you are doing, dodging all requests for evidence, is argument from authority.

      I don’t have the Greek or access to multiple manuscripts, so I have to rely on what they say - a

      Sorry? Present your evidence instead of dodging.

      and the fact that academics are always looking to disprove each other and get published.

      Cool story bro. Present your evidence.

      The historiography of early Christianity has undergone massive changes since the 1940s. (This is true for historiography across the board - my interest primarily lies in Ancient China, and the debate there is whether the Xia dynasty existed or not)

      Not what I said. I said there hasn’t been a major document discovery on this topic since the 40s. Now present your evidence instead of trying to find a gotcha .

      If you do want some academic support for a fictional Christ, you can try Richard Carrier or Bob Price (Price has a podcast!) Bob Price is absolutely insane but fun and he’s always very clear when he disagrees with consensus.

      Cool story bro, present your evidence.

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t think you would be happy with any evidence that isn’t a video recording of Jesus. Your questions are strange and reveal a lot of basic misunderstandings of the text. You haven’t been happy with any of the evidence or text I’ve cited. You misconstrue my points and attack strawmen. At this point I think you are just googling and skimming the wiki page for counter arguments. You’ve misrepresented your Greek skills, I don’t think you’ve done any serious academic study of the Bible. You throw around claims of logical fallacies like someone who skimmed the LessWrong wiki.

        I’m not really interested in arguing with you further - it really does remind me of arguing with creationists in the ‘naughts. You don’t have the historical background or reading comprehension, and I think you just want to rant about how bad Christianity is. That’s fine, but perhaps stick to claims about the belief systems of modern Christians, rather than the belief systems of 1st and 2nd century ones.

        • Atemu@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I feel sorry you had to put up with this person but I found your replies to be quite insightful :)

          • andros_rex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Here’s a fun challenge for you - read the comment thread again and count the number of times that I said I was not Christian or religious in any way. I’m not sure what response you want, because you don’t seem to be interested in reading it.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Sounds fun. Here’s one for you: explain why no one can even agree on basic biographical details of someone who not only supposedly existed but also had a brother that was around for multiple decades to answer.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I don’t think you would be happy with any evidence that isn’t a video recording of Jesus.

          You aren’t a mind reader and still deflecting. Present your evidence.

          Your questions are strange and reveal a lot of basic misunderstandings of the text.

          Yeah I suck we have established that. Present your evidence.

          You haven’t been happy with any of the evidence or text I’ve cited.

          You mentioned a writer who wrote a book series 40 years after the events that has two passages that are relevant and both are forgeries. The rest of your “evidence” has been logical fallact of argument of authority, personal attacks on me, deflections, True Scotsmen fallacy, and complaints about me.

          You misconstrue my points and attack strawmen.

          Deflecting present your evidence.

          At this point I think you are just googling and skimming the wiki page for counter arguments.

          Yeah I suck, present your evidence.

          You’ve misrepresented your Greek skill

          I did not, but again I ask you to present your evidence. Why is that so hard?

          don’t think you’ve done any serious academic study of the Bible.

          Yeah I suck, present your evidence.

          You throw around claims of logical fallacies like someone who skimmed the LessWrong wiki.

          I don’t know what that is. In either case still deflecting. Present your evidence. What else do you got besides forgery?

          m not really interested in arguing with you further - it really does remind me of arguing with creationists in the ‘naughts.

          I wouldn’t worry. You didn’t really do what I would consider argument. Hey, if A is like B in one way is it like B in all ways? No? Oh, is that a false analogy? Naughty naughty.

          You don’t have the historical background or reading comprehension,

          Yeah I suck, present your evidence.

          and I think you just want to rant about how bad Christianity is.

          Nah the various genocides it caused did that for me. You going to present your evidence now?

          That’s fine, but perhaps stick to claims about the belief systems of modern Christians, rather than the belief systems of 1st and 2nd century ones.

          They believed in hell as they documented.