this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
250 points (90.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36185 readers
1444 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

Tl;dr: No.

My opinion: It's a nice story. And with stories the most important thing is what it teaches us or makes us feel. Not that it's true. Maybe they took inspiration from several preaching hippies who lived back then and made one story out of that. Exaggerated everything and made stuff up. Probably all of it because the bible was't even written close to his supposed lifetime. It'd be like you now writing a story about a dude who died in ~~1870~~. Without any previous records to get information from. [Edit: The first things have probably been written down like 40-50 years after his death.]

And I mean if Jesus existed, he would certainly disapprove of what people do (and did) in his name.

[–] gedaliyah 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I don't know that the History Channel is a good representation of academic consensus. It should basically never be relied upon.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The tl;dr of that article isn't even "no". It provides both sides of the accounts and references academics that argue both ways.

I read it to make the same argument you did, but ended up considering it a surprisingly well written article.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

My summary is oversimplified. I still think it's the correct answer to OP's question: is there physical evidence. Because there isn't anything physical. But there are written records from a bit later, suggesting that somebody with that name must have existed. Glad someone else thinks I picked the correct article. Seems it's not that easy to find good information. The English speaking internet is filled with low quality efforts to portray the facts in a way they'd like to have them.

I have a few good books though. Back when I was young (and became an atheist,) I used to read a lot about philosophy, the political message of the New Testament. And what life was like in that time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Agree. But that specific article seems pretty alright. Also talks about the relics and history records for example by Tacitus.

There also is a Wikipedia article which I think is not written that well. And a lot of education material by churches or religious organizations which I did not cite for obvious reasons.

(And the German Wikipedia article about sources for the historicity of Jesus seems very good. But it's not exactly OP's question and I don't know if it helps: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Au%C3%9Ferchristliche_antike_Quellen_zu_Jesus_von_Nazaret )

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

There also is a Wikipedia article which I think is not written that well. And a lot of education material by churches or religious organizations which I did not cite for obvious reasons.

That's because Christian apologists constantly brigade those articles.

Edit: lol, and downvote lemmy comments I guess