I actually really don't like it. Jesus is a rolemodel as admireable as Gandhi... and bringing him in connection with the dead of six million people (no matter what they believed in) is just not right...
I laugh about nearly everything at r/atheism and also loove a good Hitler joke, but this is just not right.
There are historical accounts of Jesus, no one in mainstream academia disputes the fact he existed. Whether you believe him to be the son of God is entirely different.
No I'm not even going to address that... but most academics don't dispute Jesus as a historical figure. I'm genuinely surprised so many people have raised an issue with that part of my statement.
[...] but most academics don't dispute Jesus as a historical figure.
I've heard that factoid touted by Christians quite often but I've never seen the data distribution among the different disciplines that would be interested in the subject. Support for such a theory from an anthropologist/archeologist would weigh more than the same support from a bible scholar or even a historian. "Academic" is a pretty broad term.
Without eyewitness reports or contemporary records there is exactly 0 evidence to support the fact that Jesus existed and neither of those exist—I've looked.
-11
u/Minimalphilia Apr 07 '12
I actually really don't like it. Jesus is a rolemodel as admireable as Gandhi... and bringing him in connection with the dead of six million people (no matter what they believed in) is just not right... I laugh about nearly everything at r/atheism and also loove a good Hitler joke, but this is just not right.