RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 2:52 pm
(June 9, 2015 at 2:37 am)TheMessiah Wrote:(June 9, 2015 at 2:27 am)robvalue Wrote: People may generally agree that there was a HJ, but they don't agree on what that actually means.
Yeah, what historians consider HJ, or what they generally agree upon is a Jew that got cruciced by the romans ---- in regards to ''what it means'' then there is a stronger debate/argument to be had.
Some historians think he was signifcant, others not so much.
I'm sure there were a lot of Jews who got crucified by the Romans. There's no reason to believe that any of them were Jesus because no records exist to support it. This is just a bald-faced assertion without a shred of historical verification.
There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide mankind that cannot be achieved as well or better through secular means.
Bitch at my blog! Follow me on Twitter! Subscribe to my YouTube channel!
Bitch at my blog! Follow me on Twitter! Subscribe to my YouTube channel!