@Acinder_o7@nordicravnfrost@sola_chad The supposed Roman accounts, such as in the writings of JosephusTacitus and Pliny the Younger, are all well-argued to be later Christian forgery-interpolations
@Acinder_o7@nordicravnfrost@sola_chad 1. Claims of eyewitnesses are falsehoods. There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figurea storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narratives, the result of cumulative elaboration.
/2
@NoPurpleFood@TheExBeliever I don't. I can't. As, as you said, I have no idea... which raises the question: why are you so upset. And nasty. Now fuck off.
@NoPurpleFood@TheExBeliever Mentions are not evidence.
Moreover, the supposed mentions in Josephus, Tacitus & Pliny the Younger are all well-argued to be later Christian forgery-interpolations.
The mentions of Pilate (& Caiaphas, Herod, etc) are a literary trope called synchrony used to infer historicity.
@protedze@stoiccpath@AjeboDanny There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figure, a storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narratives, the result of cumulative elaboration
@Lana_realfans@stoiccpath@AjeboDanny There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figure, a storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narratives, the result of cumulative elaboration
@BFordress925@TheExBeliever Actual historians have little if anything to say on the issue. You're mostly appealing to Christian biblical scholars and theologians whose bias is blinding (& a few hangers-on like Bart Erhman & the late Maurice Casey)
@NoPurpleFood@TheExBeliever There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figure, a storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narratives, the result of cumulative elaboration, ie. the genre is novelistic, not documentation
@BrimstonedLLC@TheExBeliever It's not a guy who amassed a following, it's the story of a guy which amassed a following. So the following is of a literary figure...
@RealDavidMaris@LisaLiel@abi4560 No. What you're doing is the fallacy of composition. And you're seeking to appeal to authority. When the reality is, as I said above,
@RealDavidMaris@LisaLiel@abi4560 Richard Carrier has PhD in classical history (though I don't rate him as a good historian of early Christianity).
A few biblical scholars who doubt but didn't/don't outright argue the issue are Thomas L Thompson & rhe late Phillip Davies, among others.
@RealDavidMaris@LisaLiel@abi4560 A few scholars...
And brain-fart Bart is not a historian
(neither are most if not all scholars who tout a 'historical Jesus' - they're mostly Christian biblical scholars and theologians)
@AHjerdin@__SatyamSharma The supposed accounts in JosephusTacitus and Pliny the Younger are all well-argued to be later Christian forgery-interpolations.
Lucian and Mara bar Serapion are too vague to count.
@RealDavidMaris@LisaLiel@abi4560 Tim O'Neill is selective & dishonest.
There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figurea storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narratives, the result of cumulative elaboration.
@krussi34@___TheGOOdWitch There's no suitable evidence that NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figure, a storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or about earlier narrativesthe result of cumulative elaboration
@AHjerdin@__SatyamSharma The supposed accounts in Josephus and Tacitus are well-argued to be later Christian forgery-interpolations.
There's no evidence NT Jesus has ever been anything other than a literary figure, a storybook character, albeit in a lot of narratives, including narratives based on or
/2