• frog_brawler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I didn’t provide any article. I read the one you linked.

    In this most recent response, you are annotating sources from 93, and 117. Those years are notably (at minimum) 60 years after the supposed resurrection; and as such are not first hand accounts.

    They very likely was someone named Jesus, because there were many people with that name. There was very likely someone named Jesus that was crucified, because many people were crucified. There’s 0 evidence or recorded documentation that a resurrection ever happened. That’s the big one.

    • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      They very likely was someone named Jesus, because there were many people with that name.

      The second one doesn’t use that name. Read the sources.

      There’s 0 evidence or recorded documentation that a resurrection ever happened. That’s the big one.

      Well of course, but that’s common sense. Dead people stay dead as a rule.

        • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          There’s 0 evidence or recorded documentation that a resurrection ever happened. That’s the big one.

          The question in question was “Is there any real physical proof that Jesus christ ever existed?”

          • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Jesus Christ is very specific. Jesus Christ, the son of God, who was crucified and rose again on the third day… that is fake.

            • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Well that’s an entirely different question. Entirely different field.

              “the son of God, who was crucified and rose again on the third day” is for silly Christians.

              The question under discussion here is about Roman-era history.

              • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 months ago

                You suck ass at reading. The title of this post is asking about “Jesus Christ,” which we all know to mean the son of God and the guy that resurrected after 3 days.

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

                  The title of this post is asking about “Jesus Christ,” which we all know to mean the son of God and the guy that resurrected after 3 days.

                  lol no… this thread is not talking about anything like that hahaha. Read it.

                  Obviously people don’t come back from the dead or transform into cheddar cheese; we don’t need historical research to tell us that.

                  His given name was יֵשׁוּעַ‎ or Yeshua, which is Jesus in one speech-type, عيسى (ʿIsà) in another, as well as a lot of other variants.

                  ‘Christus’ in Latin seems to refer to the same person; Tacitus wrote “called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus”

                  • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I’m not debating with you the question that was asked as to start this thread. It’s visible to literally anyone that looks it.

                    If you wanted to answer a question that was not asked by the OP, that’s on you.

                • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  What do you think of what Ehrman says here at 1h45m25s that the mythicist theory isn’t taken seriously by the academy because it’s mostly pushed by people who seem eager to dunk on religion.