To Atheists: Who, in your opinion, was Jesus Christ?

[Astreja]

We actually have writings by Julius Caesar himself. Not a peep from Jesus.

[h4ym4n]

We actually have writings by Julius Caesar himself.  Not a peep from Jesus.

Hold on there!

He must have written down his 40 day in the desert experience, right?

It was just jesus and devil so one of them had to write it down. Jesus had more to gain from the story.

[Pat Mustard]

Hoo boy.  You sure have swallowed a lot of misinformation.

I think that, given the available evidence, it is impossible to know who or what Jesus Christ was.  That being the case, we likely must look to guides outside the evidence to decide what to believe.

Then IMHO you have not truly examined the evidence. Personally on AF, I myself do not engage in discussions about historical accuracy because I go, generally, with the scholarly concensus, that Jesus was cruxified by Pontious Pilate and that the disciples believed they witnessed him alive after 3 days. It is perhaps the most thoughouly documented ancient biographical accounts created within living memory of the reported events. Those are just basic facts. People who think Jesus was a mythological creation are ignorant beyond words.

Chad, your personal assumptions =/= facts. You believe what you believe not because there is evidence, but because you were indoctrinated.

[Astreja]

We actually have writings by Julius Caesar himself.  Not a peep from Jesus.

Hold on there!

He must have written down his 40 day in the desert experience, right?

It was just jesus and devil so one of them had to write it down. Jesus had more to gain from the story.

Probably the same eavesdropper who was lurking around in Gethsemane and in the void before the creation of the Earth.

[Fake Messiah]

Jesus was a gay guy (he never married but was in his 30s, and he couldn't live without his twelve guys with whom he had sex) who was fighting for gay marriage and LGBTQ equality (that men can kiss and hold hands in public, and also adopt kids), but the religious zealots killed him.



https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...y-probably

[no one]

Well daddy likes the cock, it stands to reason, the son also would.

[The Grand Nudger]

I love it when the phrase scholarly consensus pops up. Strangely, in Christian use, it’s a term of art. The field itself is a running joke full of charlatans. That, though, they’ll accept…even as they deny biology.

[h4ym4n]

Well daddy likes the cock, it stands to reason, the son also would.

Does daddy prefer cut or uncut?

[Silver]

Well daddy likes the cock, it stands to reason, the son also would.

Does daddy prefer cut or uncut?

Both.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Then IMHO you have not truly examined the evidence. Personally on AF, I myself do not engage in discussions about historical accuracy because I go, generally, with the scholarly concensus, that Jesus was cruxified by Pontious Pilate and that the disciples believed they witnessed him alive after 3 days. It is perhaps the most thoughouly documented ancient biographical accounts created within living memory of the reported events. Those are just basic facts. People who think Jesus was a mythological creation are ignorant beyond words.

Chad, your personal assumptions =/= facts. You believe what you believe not because there is evidence, but because you were indoctrinated.

Who is Chad? Anyway, I believe that historical facts are facts indeed. And there are many historical facts about the life of Jesus that both skeptics and believers can accept as justified and well established, as summarized by NT scholar, Gary Habermas, in his work on early creeds. Thes historical facts include that Jesus was cruxified dead by Pontius Pilate. He was buried dead. And the disciples believed they saw him alive later. You can infer whatever you want from those facts, which is what they are.