why is the existance of an historical jesus treated like a fact even among atheists when there aren't any proof of any? no contemporary historiacl sourches mentioning him except the bible.weren't the romans good record keepers? wouldnt they write down if there was some new popular cult leader causing ruckus in judea?
>>18618804If Jesus didn’t exist then the past 2000 years of Christian (and for that matter Muslim) activity was based on a pure lie and was pointless.
>>18618812well yeah
>>18618812This. It's like how the Chinese know that they don't actually have 3000 years of continuity but they have to keep pretending anyway because the legitimacy of the government and state rely on it.
>>18618818most western countries are secular and not really religious anymore, there is no reason to keep the grift alive
>>18618804I thought they had some non-biblical sources mentioning Jesus.
>>18618821Western institutions were historically intertwined or even founded by whatever powerful church or clergy was in the area centuries ago. They aren't so easily dismissed just because the average modern first worlder today is merely "culturally Christian".
>>18618804Roman historians at the time like Tacitus take it for granted that Jesus was a real guy who did in fact exist>no contemporary historiacl sourches mentioning him except the bible.incorrect>wouldnt they write down if there was some new popular cult leader causing ruckus in judea?something you need to understand is that on the scale of the Roman Empire, Judea was a really unimportant part of it that wasn't afforded much attention and the Romans didn't put much effort into placating or subjagating the Jews hence why they revolted a number of times and then the Romans destroyed the temple and casually massacred them, because they saw that region and the people there of such little consequence.But as I said, there are some Roman writers like Tacitus that write about Jesus and Christians as having actually existed at the time.Also in writings from the Sanhedrin that became part of the Talmud, they casually talk about Jesus and take the credit for executing him and even say he did perform miracles (but they just chalk it up to sorcery); if Jesus really didn't exist at all then why would the Jewish leaders and scribes themselves go out of their way to validate an enemy religion that they considered heretical based around a 'fictional' 'false' Messiah and Rabbi if they knew he didn't exist at all? Wouldn't they just say it was all made up instead? The fact that they don't think to do this but instead talk matter-of-factly like he did exist suggests it's taken for granted at the time and to their audience that everyone knows he did exist in recent living memory.Also also, historians know literally every other significant figure described in the narrative like Pontius Pilate, Herod, Herodias etc really did exist at the time described; even John the Baptist is taken for granted as a historical figure.
>>18618849Why do you have a pathological need to have jewish wizards as imaginary friends?
>>18618849>Roman historians at the time like Tacitus take it for granted that Jesus was a real guy who did in fact exist>>18618849>something you need to understand is that on the scale of the Roman Empire, Judea was a really unimportant part of it didn't stop them from writing about other jewish rebel groups like the zealots>if Jesus really didn't exist at all then why would the Jewish leaders and scribes themselves go out of their way to validate an enemy religion that they considered heretical based around a 'fictional' 'false' Messiah and Rabbi if they knew he didn't exist at all?to spite christians, to make hostilities against christians bigger among jews which prevents jews from gaining sympathy with christianity which could lead to conversion.also christianity was a psyop to get pagan gentiles to embrace monotheism
>>18618898>>Roman historians at the time like Tacitus take it for granted that Jesus was a real guy who did in fact existnot contemporary by the way
>>18618804Lmao if the new left historians of the 60s-70s could’ve put Jesus’ existence into reasonable doubt they definitely would have but even they realized how bad it would look to hold his existence to a higher standard than other figures from classical antiquity or pre-colonial history.
>>18618902Muh leftists
>>18618906They literally called themselves the “New Left” and defined an entire era of western history tho.
>>18618804Because Christians screech at you and make your existence impossible.
