what do you say to people that claim jesus was a mythological

Say,

>Hey, you're probably right!

>>1813549
It's certainly not indisputable that Jesus didn't exist but I think there's strong enough of a case that it should at least be respected as a plausible theory in academia

>>1813557
expand.

What else is new?

>>1813549
he's better attested to than 90% of classical figures.

>>1813579
Luke Skywalker is better attested he must be real including all them jedi powers n shit.

>>1813579
In texts that have already agreed by scholars to contain Christian interpolations. see Josephus and "chrestos" in Tacitus

File: Reliability of NT.jpg (1MB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3508x2480px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Testimonium_Flavianum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2014/09/04/an-atheists-defense-of-the-historicity-of-jesus/

>"He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees"

- Bart Ehrman

>"There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more.

- Michael Grant

>"In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.

- Richard Burridge

>>1813549
"you are correct."

/thread

>>1813593
Those interpolations have to do with whether Jesus was indeed the Messiah, not whether there was traveling rabbi from Nazareth who was crucified by Pontius Pilate.

>>1813549
>"I agree."

>>1813612
There is no basis for separating the neutral statements about Jesus from the positive, undeniably Christian statements in Josephus. I'll admit that it is a possibility, but it can't be used as proof that Jesus existed when the whole passage being an interpolation is an equally likely possibility

>>1813586
ah yes
for there are many texts written by individuals contemporary to or shortly after the life of luke skywalker that attest to his existence
>>1813593
The Christian Interpolations you mention do not pertain to the mentions of Christ but to his role -- Josephus in particular. Christians edited the texts to paint him in a more favorable light, but he was still mentioned.

That they're most likely right.

Even if he did exist, he was just a preacher in Iudea. He was not some super-human god-man, and he certainly did not say or teach that which the Bible ascribes to him, as most of the Bible is composed of Pauline additions.

>Guys there might have been some wondering beggar cult leader that stired some shit up therefore everything from six-day world creation to Jewish slaves building the pyramids must be real to said cult leader coming back on a cloud must be real!

>>1813654
wandering*

>>1813635
Why should I accept that part of the passage is authentic? it's an equally likely possibility the whole passage is an interpolation. Neutral statements aren't proof. You'd be hard-pressed to write a paragraph about a person without making any statements on information that are neutral, even if your goal was to praise the person

Because people never believed in stupid shit before right >>1804909

Reminder that contemporary critic Celsus said that only beggars, slaves and old wives, that is gullible plebs, believed in Christianity (before that demagogueTheodosius made it the official religion of Rome and forced it into everyone else.)

>>1813658
Because the style differs a lot between the suspect passages and rest of Josephus writings. Thus reason the academics anyway.

>>1813673
actually the state persecution of pagans had already begun by the last few years of Constantine's reign. Theodosius just did it to a wider extent than anyone previously

>>1813549
I would ask how Christianity got started if Jesus never actually existed.

>>1813692
How did Greek polytheism started if Zeus never existed? Check-mate Christ-fedoras.

>>1813549
Nothing because his existence as an actual person is irrelevant. Christianity is dead in both cases.

>>1813696
Did anyone ever claim that Zeus lived on earth continuously for 30 years and travelled around teaching people?

>>1813701
Fuck off, gnostic

>>1813706
He lived on earth intermittently and travelled around fucking people. What a god actually lmao no wonder people worship him

>>1813706
Philo of Byblos claimed Cronus and other Phoenician gods lived human lives

>>1813706
Actually according to Plato the gods could often walk among humans in disguise.
Hellenic polytheism had a plethora of god-men and sons of god.
They had the oracles with which they could communicate with the gods directly, Socrates is said to have started his ministry after Apollo had spoken to him through the oracle at Delphi. How can you deny that Socrates existed? Therefore Apollo exists.
Also Pythagoras, etc. etc.

>>1813708
Do you mean gnostic as in not agnostic or gnostic as in pathetic life-denying pussy?

>theists in the current year
loving every laugh

Though it's different in the case of Christianity considering it appears so abruptly. Something happened in Judaea around 30 AD. Something that later motivated several people to write chronicles about or otherwise mention a Jesus figure. So what happened?

>>1813732
Gnostic as in incarnation denying scum

>>1813753
Gnostics don't deny that. Also there were many Gnostic beliefs.

>>1813752
the fact that it was so widely spread so early suggests that it was a religious change within Hellenized communities of Jews, not the effort of a few missionaries.

>>1813752
>Something must have happened in the 1820s that motivated several people to convert to Mormonism.
>Therefore Mormonism is true.
I> mean Joseph Smith is an attested historical figure riiiiiight???
Christard "logic". Kill yourselves.

>>1813767
>>1813769

>>1813769
Are you pulling me leg, lad? Joseph Smith being an attested historical figure is exactly my point. Ancient Greek beliefs might've developed gradually originating in even older proto-belief, but both Mormonism and Christianism obviously had a catalyst that sparked the development of the religion. In the case of Mormonism we know it was Joseph Smith. We don't know what it was exactly for Christianism. Even if we agree with >>1813767
we'd have to explain where Jesus creation comes from. Whether it's something a bunch of Jews just decided to blatantly lie about. Seems pretty far-fetched to me, though. Some of Jesus actions were pretty public.

>>1813769
>christianity
>largest religion in the world (2 billion people)

>mormonism
>sect of christianity (14.5 million people)

>>1813781
>cuckoldianity
>2000 years old
>age of forced convertions, crusades, inquisition

>mormonism
>not even 200 years
>age of secularism

You're moronic.

>>1813780
It doesn't require blatant lies, it just requires a change in religious beliefs. one group decides that a physical manifestation of the Jesus figure on Earth is needed in order for the sacrifice to work so they deduce that Jesus must have physically existed on earth.

>>1813780
> bunch of [X] just decided to blatantly lie about
What's so far-fetched about it? Islam, Mormonism and Scientology is literally just that. Face it, Christofaggotry was the Mormonism of its time.

>>1813797
How do you mean? Remember these are basically contemporaneous (what a word) events. Or at least not separated more than a generation. There are reports of Christians very soon after Jesus' alleged death.

>>1813802
Do you dispute that Muhammed existed?

>>1813808
No, as I don't dispute that a mendicant cult leader could have existed in Palestine or that Joseph Smith existed. It doesn't mean of of the claims of the religions founded by/after them are true. This is what christfaggotards can't get into their impenetrable empty skull.

>>1813805
Christians =/= modern Christian beliefs. all of the early christian documents we have aren't familiar with the gospel stories or Jesus's sayings, which should be central to the movement if it was based around him. Paul actually says that his gospel and everyone before him's gospel came from revelation, not from men

>>1813817
Yea. That wasn't my point. I was only arguing for the historicity of some kind of Jesus on the basis of the abrupt appearance of the religion soon after his death.

>>1813802
All three of those religions have historical figures widely accepted by scholars to have existed.

Are you trying to be satirical? We know Smith, Mohamed, and Hubbard were real people.

>>1813818
Gonna need some hot sources for these huge claims.

>>1813549
Jesus definitely existed, what's in dispute is whether he rose from the dead, was born of a virgin, and all the rest of the hocus pocus.

>>1813835
>lacking basic reading comprehesion
Wew. Christians are some of the dumbest people in existence who would have figured they also can't read?

File: smug_jung.jpg (127KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1200x1200px

>implying myth is a bad thing

>>1813855
legends are better

>>1813836
Galations 1:11-12
11 But I certify to you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached by me is not according to man;
12 for I neither received it from man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

having trouble finding where he says everyone's gospel came from revelation though. possibility that I misremembered an addition to what I quoted. But there is an contradiction to the conventional account of Jesus's early followers in the gospels and according to Paul:

Corinthians 15:3-8
3 For I delivered to you, as of prime importance, what also I received:
that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
4 and that he was buried,
and that he has been raised on the third day according to the scriptures,
5 and that he was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve;
6 afterward he was seen by over 500 brothers at one time, most of whom
are still alive, though some have fallen asleep;
7 afterward he was seen by James, then by all the apostles;
8 last of all, as to one abnormally born, he was seen by me as well.

Who is this 12 with Peter? it certainly can't be the 12 apostles, which Peter was one of. obviously there's a huge gap between knowledge of the real early movement and the gospels even on basic details like this

>>1813860
And to think I almost took you seriously...

>>1813849
I'm not even Christian. You replied to a chain of posts where someone compared Smith to Jesus, claiming both were fictional people with sarcasm. Then you repeated the comparison with their respective religions.

Did you get that wound up by people talking about Christianity? I swear internet atheists are the most thin skinned people alive. This is why everyone pretends they're just agnostic.

Yes, Paul received divine revelation. He didn't give an account of Jesus's life, as far as I remember. He simply taught the early church some of his teachings.

Peter was likely referring to Mary or simply made a grammatical mistake by switching to the third person and back. I'm not familiar with the passage, but that's hardly an indictment on what the early church possessed. At most, you've raised a concern with early translations. How does this prove the church wasn't in possession of this very same gospel?

Honestly this is a joke. Do you have any proof that the early church documents don't have accounts oh Jesus's life or teachings?

>>1813860
Nevertheless, all stories agree on the broad strokes and rough sequence of events. Are there any accounts that dispute that Jesus was sentenced by Pilates and publicly crucified? These events should've been easy to confirm for people living in that area around the time, and even for people living in the greater Roman area, which was pretty globalized, as it were, for the time.

>>1813891
>Are there any accounts that dispute that Jesus was sentenced by Pilates and publicly crucified?
Actually, let me retract that. It doesn't matter. The point is that it seems exceedingly improbably that a group of Jews constructed a Jesus persona and attached a life story to him when it would've been very easy for people to fact check it considering he lived so close to the period when Christians started appearing.

>>1813891
>Are there any accounts that dispute that Jesus was sentenced by Pilates and publicly crucified?
Actually yes: the Ascension of Isaiah has Jesus crucified by Satan in the lower heavens. I don't see why Christians would write such a thing if they didn't believe it. Paul doesn't even specifically say that Pilate crucified Jesus, he says Jesus was crucified by the "authorities of this world," which is can be read as human or demonic powers and often is used to refer to demonic powers. that Satan is the ruler of this world is a big part of christian theology, especially among gnostics

>>1813897
I don't find it too incredible that if Jesus was later historicized that they would attach him to the time period of the early movement. the fact is that the gospels were written more than a generation after Jesus's supposed death and early christian writers aren't familiar with even Jesus's sayings, which should have spread easily with the movement as an oral tradition. when they appeal to authority on anything it's not to sayings of Jesus or his actions, but to scripture and personal revelation.

>>1813903
then where did the pilate story come from?

>>1813988
From Philo of Alexandria maybe? I know he mentions Pilate. There is a passage in Philo's writings that it quite similar to the story of Jesus being paraded around as "King of the Jews" so it wouldn't be the only thing they took from him:

>The Works of Philo Judaeus – Flaccus, VI.

>(36) There was a certain madman named Carabbas ... this man spent all this days and nights naked in the roads, minding neither cold nor heat, the sport of idle children and wanton youths;

>(37) and they, driving the poor wretch as far as the public gymnasium, and setting him up there on high that he might be seen by everybody, flattened out a leaf of papyrus and put it on his head instead of a diadem, and clothed the rest of his body with a common door mat instead of a cloak and instead of a sceptre they put in his hand a small stick of the native papyrus which they found lying by the way side and gave to him;

>(38) and when, like actors in theatrical spectacles, he had received all the insignia of royal authority, and had been dressed and adorned like a king, the young men bearing sticks on their shoulders stood on each side of him instead of spear-bearers, in imitation of the bodyguards of the king, and then others came up, some as if to salute him, and others making as though they wished to plead their causes before him, and others pretending to wish to consult with him about the affairs of the state.

>(39) Then from the multitude of those who were standing around there arose a wonderful shout of men calling out Maris!; and this is the name by which it is said that they call the kings among the Syrians; for they knew that Agrippa was by birth a Syrian, and also that he was possessed of a great district of Syria of which he was the sovereign;

>>1813549
That there is more evidence for the existence of Jesus than some Roman leaders

>>1814092
Considering that we have the emperors' faces on coins minted during their reigns, I'd say no.

>>1813549
>>1813605


Mark has original Aramaic saying which date back to Palestine in 40AD, Maurice Casey has decrypted Mark to show that it was likely written by a person who had an Aramaic background and native language, Mark has embarassing story of Jesus being angry, the idea of your saviour being crucified, the random cut off at the end of the empty tomb, Mark preserving Jesus' sayings in Aramaic. Mark leaving in strange phrases that Jesus used such as Son of Boanerges.

Scholars have agreed that Mark is the earliest, with many scholars who are not Christian saying that it is likely that Mark could have been written in the 40's while conservative Christians mark it around 50-65, finally liberal scholar date it around 70-80 depending on their rationale.

Expand later when Tacitus gets his sources from Pliny the Younger and condemns the Christians as superstitious people. Tacitus work is considered the most reliable of ancient Roman sources.

Mara-Bar Zurabian mentioning Jesus in his letters around the time of 100AD.

Paul meeting up with the disciples, mainly James and Peter who had close relations with Jesus in his letter to the Galatians. Paul's mention of early hymn in 1 Corinthians 15 which was a pre-Pauline hymn that even Bart Ehrman dates back to 6 months to a year since Jesus' death. Christian scholar even disagree with this, some saying 2-3 years since Jesus death.

>>1814129
Are you purposely misreading his post or just stupid?

>>1813654
That isn't the point you idiot. This is about people who say that Jesus wasn't a real person.
You don't have to believe in the teachings of Muhammad or L. Ron Hubbard to acknowledge that they were real people.

>>1813654
>>1813769
>>1813696

>Dr Suess is real because there is a book about him xDD
>Prove to me that Santa Claus exist xDD
>Le Zeus and Horus were crucified xDD
>A book about fairytales XDDD
>Muh scientific pruuf
>teh burden of truth lies on you
>Waiting for le evidence xDDD
>LUKE SKYWALKER

Atheists are some of the most dumbest people I have ever seen. Dumb people pretending to be smart.

>>1813549
That there is evidence that he existed. Saying he was the son of God is an entire different story though.

>>1815150

What a great argument you're making. Really made me think.

We take the existance of many historical figures as a given, even though no contemporaneous sources exist and only writings are 300+ years after the fact. There are direct accounts from around 100ad of jesus, so he probably existed. Son of god? Depends on your religiosity and religion you follow

>>1813696
Zeus did exist, his tomb is on Crete.

File: 33.png (109KB, 500x815px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x815px

Fuck off atheists. This is strictly an anti-fedora site, there's no place for your kind here. You hold ridiculous and inconsistent beliefs, yet you claim to be smart and intellectual, and spread your idiocy wherever you get your dorito-powdered hands on.

At least the smartest ones among you tend to realize how illogical and baseless atheism is later on in life and convert to Christianity or other religions.
The rest of the world laughs at you.

>>1815184
I'm seen the light!
I'm convinced by your superior intellect sir! That the earth is flat and 6000 years old and snakes and donkeys can speak! How did I miss such spiritual gifts of faith before? I was blind, but now I see!

Stop conversing with fedora-lords who are so butthurt that they will reject the findings of any credible scholar because it hurts their fee-fees