The (non) existence of Jesus

[Minimalist]

There is more evidence for a historical Jesus than there is for Socrates,

There is no evidence for jesus...at least as you imagine him. There are a couple of written references to Socrates. Aside from Plato, Aristotle and the historian Xenophon wrote of him. He was also ridiculed by Aristophanes in "The Clouds." Other Greek playwrights also satirized him including Callias and Eupolis.

Of 'jesus' we hear nothing but your faith based bullshit.

[robvalue]

Whoever wrote all that nonsense in the gospels would be laughing their arses off if they could see that people are lapping it all up as real now.

[JesusHChrist]

Yes, they'd really be laughing their asses off if they read over the history of the Catholic Church or took a visit to one of those mega-Church monstrosities.

Talk about the ultimate troll, circa 100 A.D.

[Crossless2.0]

Jesus' existence would strike me as more likely if there was a contemporary analogue of an Aristophanes, sending him up. That all we have is Paul's ravings and anonymous fan fiction decades later is hardly the sort of "evidence" that strikes me as trustworthy.

[Minimalist]

And not coincidentally, Crossless, c 165 we DO begin to see Greco-Roman writers noticing xtian bullshit. Lucian of Samosata, in The Passing of Peregrinus wrote:

"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. … You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains their contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."

The mid-second century is when this happy horseshit seems to get going.

[FreeTony]

It's a shame that Jesus decided to spread his message by actively avoiding anyone capable of writing. Personally, I'd have waited until humans invented the cameraphone.

Then again, I've never understood why God needed to clone himself to then sacrifice himself to himself, in order to persuade himself to change a rule he himself made earlier.

[RobbyPants]

I bet 99% of christians have no idea how fine a line Jesus is hanging from. Considering they don't even know the bible, it's not much of a stretch that they don't know the history of the bible.

I think most don't know much at all about the origins of the Bible and their religion. That being said, I know quite a few fundies who fancy themselves scholars that can tell you all sorts of "facts" about the early Bible. They think the Gospels were all eye-witness accounts and were written earlier than they were.

To them, there is no problem to resolve. If you show them any contradictory evidence, it's just more proof about all of the atheist lies to kill God.

[The Grand Nudger]

Self-fulfilling prophecy, bit like their persecution myth, really.

[Minimalist]

And people wonder why I can't stand bible-thumpers!

[Neo-Scholastic]

Serious question...do you all think Buddha was a myth too?