RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 5, 2015 at 4:04 pm
(This post was last modified: June 5, 2015 at 4:05 pm by TheMessiah.)
(June 5, 2015 at 4:02 pm)robvalue Wrote: So... Jesus is only 99% mythical then. I don't see what difference it makes about that 1% of banal factoids. Why is this such a big deal I wonder? When you have that little information about someone, saying it's "based on" them really doesn't mean much at all.
I don't know what you mean by 99% mythical. No serious Historian, nor me ever proposed that Jesus was a magical figure - I'm not going to entertain absurdity.
But was he a figure who had a grassroots movement, tried to reform the Jewish faith and got killed for it? Most likely. His followers had to reconcile his embarrassing death and the Jewish prophecy.
The evidence for his existence is actually better attested to than some other historical figures - I mean, we all know how illogical Christians are, but sometimes I wonder whether there is an ideological desire to undermine the existence of Jesus.
