Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaakglith12194
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
"Most modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate."
Almost universal assent. Note how that wikipedia article never once says anything about proof of existence. In fact, the whole article seems to state that this entire "Historicity of Jesus" is done by people who don't doubt that he existed already and work from that assumption. Here's something worth mentioning though:
""Christ myth theory" is an umbrella term that applies to a range of arguments that question the existence of Jesus as described in the Christian gospels. The theory that Jesus never existed at all has support from a small minority of modern scholars."
Still waiting for you to point me to any reliable account of history taken from the christian bible.
|
Are you denying that a man named Jesus existed who said he was the messiah and crucified by the Roman governor Pilate? I don't think any serious scholar or historian disputes this. You can't change the course of 2000 years when you never existed.
Quote:
Most modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[1][2][not in citation given][3][4] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus,[5] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[6][7][8]
classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[9][10][11]
|