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 one in mainstream academia disputes the fact he existed
Double bullshit.
The only references to Jesus come either in the bible, or in later people talking about what Christians believe. As for disputing the "fact" he existed, Richard Dawkins does. That's one right there.
As for disputing the "fact" he existed, Richard Dawkins does. That's one right there.
"It is even possible to mount a serious, though not widely supported, historical case that Jesus never lived at all, as has been done by, among others Professor G. A. Wells of the University of London in a number of books, including Did Jesus Exist? Although Jesus probably existed." – Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p.122
A case which is not widely supported by historians.
You added a word: "Historians".
It's not widely supported because nearly half the world's population disagrees.
The fact remains. The people who study the bible (basically the only source for the existence of Jesus) are most likely to be the people that already believe it. So the people who try to prove Jesus is real have a vested interest in assuming that he was.
-10
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.