(January 9, 2017 at 8:22 pm)operator Wrote: to OP
probably because jesus never existed. The proof for the existence of a "Jesus of Nazareth," is shaky at best.
Problem is, the historians have not reached a consensus on really any of the details surrounding this man. Some historians believe that Jesus was actually a common name then and the Bible actually refers to several different people as jesus throughout the Old Testament. All of this stuff is so loose and undefined that who the fuck knows what the truth is.
Even if Jesus did exist? So what? That is honestly my biggest point.
Yes, I understand that. I heard David Fitzgerald say recently that if someone asks you if Jesus existed, the correct answer is, "I don't know for sure - and either do you!" Bart Erhman really pisses me orf about this topic, as he talks of the "overwhelming evidence" of his existence and that he knows "with certitude" that it's a fact.
