• CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s interesting to flip over to the talk portion of that page. When reading through the article, I wondered about some of the language myself. Seems I was right to read through the Talk tab…seems the best way to describe the consensus is that he was more likely to exist than not. But that’s really about as strong a position as can be put forth (honestly) by the advocates of a historic Jesus.

    • WatTyler@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I mean correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think I said any different? All we are reasonably sure of is:

      1. He existed.
      2. He was baptised by John the Baptist.
      3. He was crucified.

      However, any non-Christian who claims that Jesus of Nazareth was a mythical figure, as the original commenter did, discredits all of us non-Christians who find it ridiculous to believe that this man was the Messiah.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m not sure of any of those three. The consensus seems to be that it’s probably more likely he existed vs. not. But there is no real evidence for it.

        • WatTyler@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m honestly curious as to what sort of evidence you’d like to see? By the standards of ancient history, Jesus of Nazareth is a reasonably well-attested figure.