250
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 200 points 5 months ago

No. But physical proof is not the standard we use for determining someone's historical existence.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 31 points 5 months ago

Literary proof is, but also doesn't exist for Jesus Christ.

There's a few mentions of just a "Jesus" but its not like no one else was named Jesus, and those don't really make any mention of him being remarkable in any way.

There's just no evidence

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 69 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

AFAIK most historians/scholars agree that Jesus was a real person (even if a lot of the Bible's claims about what he did are not true). But I'm not a historian. What are you basing your opinion on?

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 54 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

There exists documented proof in many bits of literature from around 200 BCE to around 100 CE of numerous different figures in what is called 'Jewish Apocalypticism', basically a small in number but persistent phenomenon of Jews in and around what was for most of that time the Roman province of Palestine, preaching that the end would come, that God or a Messiah would return or arise and basically liberate the region and install a Godly Kingdom, usually after or as part of other fantastical events.

Jesus was one of many of these Jewish Apocalypticists. Much like the rest of the movement's key figures, they were wrong, and their lives were greatly exaggerated in either their writings or writings about them or inspired by them.

This seems to be the (extremely condensed) opinion of most Biblical Scholars.

There are a very small number of modern Biblical Scholars that are 'Mythicists' of some kind, who believe that Jesus was completely fictional and wholly invented by certain people or groups.

This is an unpopular view amongst scholars and historians of that time and region, as most believe it more plausible that Jesus was just another example of a radical Jewish Apocalyptic preacher, which again, was fairly common for roughly 300 years in that region.

Its like how if you go to a big city theres always that one guy with a megaphone preaching imminent doom. 99% of people think this is silly and ignore them, but tons of people know that people like them exist and do have small followings.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (42 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
[-] Psiczar@aussie.zone 98 points 5 months ago

As an atheist I believe Jesus existed, I just don’t think he was the son of god or that he was resurrected.

It would have been far easier to start a religion around a real man with actual followers than if he was a figment of someone’s imagination.

[-] distantsounds@lemmy.world 52 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I like to picture my Jesus as a desert hippie that people liked and told tall tales of in order to give people living in that harsh environment some hope and meaning.

[-] Bdtrngl@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago

I like to think of Jesus with like giant eagles wings and singing lead vocals for lynyrd skynyrd with like an Angel Band, and I'm in the front row, and I'm hammered drunk.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 800XL@lemmy.world 42 points 5 months ago

IIRC, the religion didn't get anywhere is Palestine after Jesus supposedly died and it wasn't until decades later that it picked up in and around Greece thanks to Paul, but no one was around that saw any of the events attributed to Jesus - it was all heresay.

I mean the bible is how many pages and how much of it actually takes place during Jesus's life? And what is the timespan of the small part that does? Like a year? And the 4 gospels that talk about it are all rehashings of the same stories (more or less) and even contradict each other at times.

That's a story with a lot of gaps and plot holes to base a belief system around - and that doesn't even include all the baggage and hate that comes along with it.

People nowadays lose their mind and make death threats to the creators of stories that don't fix or create new plot holes in canon. And we're supposed to smile, nod, and happily accept one of the worst constructed stories ever just because some old white men that live the opposite way they tell us to live say so?

[-] Meron35@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago

Religion is the OG fandom war

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 96 points 5 months ago

What do you mean by physical proof?

Some history is known by digging up physical stones n bones. Some is known by digging up texts.

There are multiple texts dated to the 1st century that all corroborate the story that a person called Jesus was crucified around 33AD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_historicity_of_Jesus

[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 54 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It's weird how many people in this thread are vaguely debating the validity of the historical research into this question when one person has posted a link to a well cited article on this very very heavily studied subject.

There's even a link to a well cited article examining the skepticism of the historicity of Jesus: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory

I don't feel compelled to argue an interpretation. The facts are well documented and their interpretations by experts available. What anyone chooses to do with these are of no real concern to me.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago

The evidence isn't even that strong, there i just aren't that many people willing to risk becoming a pariah to dispute them.

If you are a Christian, there is no doubt Jesus existed. Any oblique reference to a rabbi who was persecuted hundreds years ago is considered evidence that Jesus existed. But no contemporaneous documentation exists.

If you're not a Christian, debunking all of those vague references that might be proof of a Jewish leader named Jesus just isn't particularly important, won't persuade anyone who believes Jesus was(is) God, and will paint a target on your back for terrorists.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[-] Shard@lemmy.world 80 points 5 months ago

Physical proof? No. But if that's the criterion for proof that someone existed, then that mean 90% of historical figures can't be proven to have existed. We don't have the remains of Alexander the Great or any artefacts we can be sure are his. We have no remnants of Plato, none of his original writings remain.

Did a person name Jesus live sometime during the first century AD? Scholars are fairly certain of that. We do have textual evidence other than the bible that points to his existence.

It is highly unlikely that he was anything like the person written about in the bible. He was likely one of many radical apocalyptic prophets of the time.

We don't have too many details about his life but because of something called the criterion of embarrassment we have good reason to believe he was baptized by a man named John the Baptist and was later crucified. (i.e. most burgeoning religions seeking legitimacy don't typically invent stories that are embarrassing to their deity)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Joshi@aussie.zone 51 points 5 months ago

I'm by no means an expert but I was briefly obsessed with comparative religion over a decade ago and I don't think anyone has given a great answer, I believe my answer is correct but I don't have time for research beyond checking a couple of details.

As a few people have mentioned there is little physical evidence for even the most notable individuals from that time period and it's not reasonable to expect any for Jesus.

In terms of literary evidence there is exactly 1 historian who is roughly contemporary and mentions Jesus. Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus mentions him twice, once briefly telling the story of his crucifixion and resurrection. The second is a mention in passing when discussing the brother of Jesus delivering criminals to be stoned.

I think it is reasonable to conclude that a Jewish spiritual leader with a name something like Jesus Christ probably existed and that not long after his death miracles are being attributed to him.

It is also worth noting the historical context of the recent emergence of Rabbinical Judaism and the overabundance of other leaders who were claimed to be Messiahs, many of whom we also know about primarily(actually I think only) from Josephus.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] jeena@piefed.jeena.net 42 points 5 months ago

The thing is that compared to other historical people we kid of have similar evidence. Like we have records of Socrates existing and we have records of some Joshua existing.

The difference is that nobody claims that Socrates was a fantastical god being who defied death, which is a extraordinary claim, we just say he was a very smart guy, we se very smart guys on a daily basis, nothing special with that so we can just believe it and even if we are wrong it has no real life implications.

For the Joshua guy, that's quite a different story. The claims about him are extraordinary and need extraordinary evidence. But we only have normal evidence. If the claims about him were true it would contradict almost everything we think we know about the universe, how it behaves, etc.

So again, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 42 points 5 months ago

The difference is that nobody claims that Socrates was a fantastical god being who defied death,

To use a more modern example, pretty much everyone agrees that Grigori Rasputin was a real person who played a crucial role in the court of the last Czar of Russia.

But there are some positively wild and unexplainable stories that have a decent amount of corroborating evidence that they happened. The story about him healing the prince via a phone call sounds like actual magic. However we all know magic isn't real, there is definitely some kind of logical explanation. But that explanation is lost to time.

So where do historians land on Rasputin? Well, there was definitely a guy called Rasputin. Some of the stories about him are true. Some are probably false or exaggerated. There isn't even a consensus on what colour the dude's eyes were. But that doesn't mean we dispute his existence.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] alekwithak@lemmy.world 33 points 5 months ago

The new testament stories were written well over a hundred years after. That would be like someone today writing an account of the civil war based solely on stories.

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 5 months ago

Ah yes, the civil war. Which one??

[-] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 26 points 5 months ago

As far as I know, we simply don't have directly contemporary, first-hand evidence of him. Even the most 'contemporary' accounts of him that still exist were written at least 50 years after he would have died, and those are quite cursory. Perhaps primary sources were lost--or intentionally destroyed when they didn't align with beliefs--or perhaps they never existed. There's not even much evidence for Pontius Pilate (I think one source mentioning that he was recalled to Rome and executed for incompetence?), and there should be, given that he was a Roman official.

People that study the history of the bible--as in, the historical bible, not the bible as a religious text--tend to believe that a historical Jesus existed, even if they don't believe that he was divine.

IMO, the most likely explanation is that Jesus was yet another in a long-line of false messiahs, and was summarily executed by Rome for trying to start yet another rebellion. Since cult members tend to be unable to reconcile reality with their beliefs, they could have reframed their beliefs to say that he was a spiritual messiah, rather than a physical messiah.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

There's a bunch of old texts about a Jewish "prophet" called Jesus, who was gathering some followers. As far as I understand, there's no really reason not to believe the person existed.

Then again, all the Jesus lore, there's no reason to believe his miracles were real as those made no sense and there's no real proof besides those same texts written after Jesse's death

[-] Apepollo11@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago

This. There is evidence that a preacher called Jesus existed, was crucified, and was well-regarded enough to start a following that persisted even after his death.

There isn't, however, strong historical evidence for any of the magical parts of it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] nednobbins@lemm.ee 24 points 5 months ago

The question is typically described as "the historicity of Jesus". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

There are similar debates for other famous ancient figures.

The general academic consensus on Jesus (and many similar figures) is that they did exist and many of the details have been fictionalized.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 5 months ago

There is no proof outside of the Bible and some other writings. Even those mentions seem to have occurred well after Jesus supposedly lived.

In terms of non-literary proof, there isn't anything credible.

There's more evidence that King David existed.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 29 points 5 months ago

Chances are he was more like a cult leader it wasn’t until a decade or two after his death that things really got into full swing, so chances are the actual Jesus would be quite surprised by everything “he” did.

But there were a lot of Jewish mystics cropping up at the time so it’s not impossible or even implausible for some one vaguely matching the description to have existed.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

I have said this many times-

It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if there was a "real" Jesus. The Jesus of the Bible, the Jesus that is worshiped is an impossibility. A fiction. His life is full of details that defy basic biological and physical laws. On top of that, nothing he supposedly said was written down at the time, so we have no idea if what is recorded to have been his sayings in the Bible are things he actually said.

I always relate it to Ian Fleming having a schoolchum who's father's name was Ernst Stavro Bloefeld. So was there a real Ernst Stavro Bloefeld? Yes. Was he a supervillain fighting the world's greatest secret agent? No.

[-] MadBob@feddit.nl 14 points 5 months ago

I don't think this answer is really in the spirit of "no stupid questions".

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (55 replies)
[-] utopiah@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

That's not the real question though. The real question is rather are there any "real physical proof" that Jesus had literally anything special that is in itself being the "son of God" or anything related to religion.

Anybody (sadly) can be crucified, especially during a period where it is trendy. Anybody can walk through part of the desert. Anybody can organize a meal, give a speech, etc.

Even if it's done exceptionally well, that does not make it special in the sense of being the proof of anything religious. We all have friends with unique talents, and social media helped us discovered that there are so many more of those around the entire world, but nobody in their right mind would claim that because Eminem can sing words intelligibly faster than the vast majority of people he is the son of "God".

I also read a book about a decade ago (unfortunately didn't write down notes about it so can't find the name back) on the history of religion, from polytheism to monotheism, and it was quite interesting. If I remember correctly one way to interpret it was through the lens of religions maintaining themselves over time and space, which could include growing to a sufficient size in terms of devout adepts. The point being that veracity was not part of the equation.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 16 points 5 months ago

Well, that's the question if you want to believe in Christianity.

It's nearly universally accepted that he is a historical figure, though there is little to no evidence of that. The OP is asking why is that the case with so little evidence. They (presumably) aren't asking for a religious reason, just as an interest in history. If you are Christian and asking this question you are well past the point of no return for your faith

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

No, there's barely any physical evidence that anyone a few hundred years ago existed.

But if writing is enough, there are some. Tacitus basically said: "Nero blamed the Christians, followers of that Guy called Jesus who Pilatus executed a few decades ago."

Wikipedia at least says both his Baptism and crucifixion are not disputed by historians.

[-] TootSweet@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

Nope. But that's also not as big a deal as a lot of folks make it.

Also, he's far from the only important(?) historical(?) figure we can't prove ever existed.

[-] DeLacue@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

Christianity exists. Religions don't tend to spring up from nowhere. Every myth has its nugget of truth. Was there a preacher back then whose followers later spread around the world? Almost certainly. Where else could Christianity have come from?

Was he the son of god though? Was he capable of all the miracles the bible claims? Is the god he preached even real? There is no evidence that the answer to these three questions is anything but no I'm afraid.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Pm_me_girl_dick@lemmyf.uk 15 points 5 months ago

Girl gets married

Girl gets shitfaced and sleeps with someone other than her husband

Girl is pregnant!

Girl makes up some dumb shit to avoid jealous rage

Shit gets waaaaay out of hand.

There are many Jesus's in the world.

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

A far more likely explanation for the age and time was that she was raped.

Not that things have changed much.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
250 points (90.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35870 readers
1384 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS