11–20 of 102 posts
I have a picture of the Jesus Boat. For some reason, I didn't go to that fenced-off place in Capernaum. I did go to the (supposed) room of the Last Supper.
Even if you're not a believer (as I'm not), these places are very moving. Totally worth the trip.
Edit: the Jesus Boat has been accurately dated to Jesus' time. There's no evidence that anyone in particular rode in it.
TLDR; jesus was a real guy. His disciples were certainly convinced of his very Godness. Most of the creeds that are the basis for the religion are very early. If you want an athiest take on it, checkout the popsci historian Bart Erhman
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
Besides the bible what other source is there? Maybe Josephus? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus I'm not a historian but it says most accept the authenticity of the name mentioned and being persecuted but that it's been manipulated over time. At best you can argue Jesus existed. So what? At the time there were a number of apocalyptic preachers, hence the format of the book of Revelation. I'm shocked th…
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
Like you said, he clearly was a real person even if all the controversial stuff is proven false.
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
Besides the bible what other source is there? Maybe Josephus? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus I'm not a historian but it says most accept the authenticity of the name mentioned and being persecuted but that it's been manipulated over time. At best you can argue Jesus existed. So what? At the time there were a number of apocalyptic preachers, hence the format of the book of Revelation. I'm shocked th…
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
But they don’t know much more. They’re constantly trying add to that bare outline, but the additions are no more than speculation.
This speculation changes frequently. The changes are based in trends in historical methodology unrelated to the Christian faith.
Was Jesus a Buddhist? Did he travel to India? In the 1960s he did.
Are these historians actually adding anything? It doesn’t seem they are.
Historians can provide missing context. For example, when the demon says “I am legion”, it was probably not a reference to Roman legions.
But there really isn’t a historical Jesus.
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
[flagged]
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
[flagged]
However, ancient Israelites who came to the Americas? Is there any evidence at all, genealogical, archaeological, myths and legends of indigenous peoples, anything for that? The article does note that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Still, you would think something would have turned up by now.
The Historicity of Jesus is such an interesting topic. There almost certainly was a man from Nazareth named Jesus (we have pretty good unbiased sources there). However, unless you are a follower of his (or potentially some related religions), there are obviously mystical things associated with him that you likely do not believe to actually have happened. Even followers disagree about the veracity of certain stories.…
And speaking of being 'historical', as in written down by a witness, there are things in the bible that strikes me as 'filled in'. I only go to church during easter, so it I had it read to me very recently.
Like the story of Jesus praying in Getshemane, it was supposed to be jesus' personal prayer, who witnessed that?
Or Jesus personal discussion with pontius pilate, again, who wrote that down? Maybe someone interviewed pilate again later, I don't know, that doesn't seem too plausible, as I never heard the name pilate written down again as one of the accounts.
Or when Jesus got tempted by the devil, again he was supposed to be alone. Did he tell his disciples afterwards, or is this completely creative writing (or oral as the first christians did it)?
These are just some of the thoughts I had while listening to the sermon. My point is I think that there was some artistic license in the whole mythology of Jesus. Maybe 'to make it flow better' or something like that.