Far to many people think that Jesus from the Bible was light skinned, even though he grew up in what we call the Middle East.
Submitted 1 year ago by TehBamski@lemmy.world to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Submitted 1 year ago by TehBamski@lemmy.world to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 year ago
If he actually loved it might even matter.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeshua of Nazareth is a historically confirmed individual. He was real, really the son of a god? Probably not.
uienia@lemmy.world 1 year ago
He is not. We have no contemporary primary sources for his existence. However there is a general historical consensus that he most likely did exist. But absolute confirmation is an impossibility.
kryptonidas@lemmings.world 1 year ago
Since it was a fairly common name, you might as well say John from Richmond is a confirmed individual.
yesman@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The best argument for Jesus’ existence comes from Christopher Hitchens.
It goes like this: We know the nativity story is made up because of the census. There was a census near the time, but it was after Harrod’s death and cannot fit the story. But why fabricate the nativity? Probably because Jesus of Nazareth is supposed to be born in the “city of David”: Bethlehem. So then, if Jesus was invented whole cloth, why not make him Jesus of Bethlehem and save the aggravation?
NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 1 year ago
There are historical records of somebody named Jesus that lived at the time. The Bible story is just horse shit. He was an apocalyptic preacher just like today, and probably had undiagnosed schizophrenia, thought he could talk to God, and was the son of God. Plenty of people think that today, and we put them in Institutions instead of create a whole ass religion out of their life.
dontbelasagne@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s like how Saint Nicholas really existed but wasn’t Santa Claus. My go to rebuttal whenever someone tries to bring up historal evidence as existence of Jesus. If you believe in the mythological version of Jesus, then you must also believe in Santa Claus
uienia@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No, there are no contemporary primary sources about him from his purported lifetime. All sources stems from several decades to centuries after his purported death.
The consensus about his existence is established based on the likelihood of him existing, but his existence can never be verified with absolute certainty.
Flyswat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
He never claimed to be the literal son of God, this is something that was addded into the dogma 2 to 3 centuries after his death during the Council of Nicaea (check Arianism).
MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 1 year ago
We have no idea if he was apocalyptic. We suspect he was a reformer as reformist movements were popular at the time.
DashboTreeFrog@discuss.online 1 year ago
Knew a theology professor (ended up in his class for credits somehow) who went with the “multiple Jesus’s” theory. Apparently it’s quite possible that stories of a variety of healers/figures got combined into the Jesus mythos. Explains a lot of the time and geographical inconsistencies with the historical record iirc
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I will say this, I can’t think of a thing Jesus says in the Bible that isn’t pretty based. He prioritized pragmatism over rules and protocol, compassion and understanding over judgment, generosity over greed, forgiveness over scorn, acts over words. Everyone following his death like Paul seem to be the ones that start to miss the point.