RE: Debating the existence of Jesus
June 24, 2013 at 5:42 pm
(This post was last modified: June 24, 2013 at 5:42 pm by Minimalist.)
Quote:Points he's made so far:
-Modern scholars agree Jesus existed, so he existed
-Tacticus and Josephus are reliable historians, so we should accept their accounts of Jesus.
-The writers of the Gospel died in very gruesome, martyr-like ways, so why would they die for something that wasn't even true?
The "modern scholars" argument fails to account for the disparity of views among those modern scholars - and ignores the fact that it is also modern scholars who think jesus is a pipe dream. Prior to the Enlightenment it would cost you your life to doubt fucking jesus. I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of "the historical jesus" (whatever the fuck that means!) backed up by actual evidence.
Tacitus never mentioned anyone named "Jesus" and Josephus' TF is a 4th century forgery.
There is no evidence that there were any disciples any more than there is evidence of jesus himself. The gospels are anonymous books, written at an unknown time but most likely well after any "disciples" were dead. In fact, the disciples seem to fulfill nothing more than the Greek chorus of contemporary literature. A bunch of guys to say "Holy SHIT, Lord" whenever their boy did something miraculous.
