Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post 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.
Posts and comments 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 non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally 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.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
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.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
Jesus is a pretty well-documented historical figured
If you disagree and have evidence no other scholar is privy to, I recommend a PhD in history as a strong avenue to correct the record.
I think the mythicists are wrong (especially Richard Carrier who is a stupid asshole), I think there was probably a guy called Jesus who had followers, but we really don't have much, if any, real evidence to back that up.
We have the Bible and 10 non Biblical mentions of Jesus. Unfortunately, every single one of the non-biblical writings are just describing Christians. They're like "Christians are people who believe in a guy named Jesus who was killed by Romans." While they prove that Christians existed when they were written, none of them lend any evidence to the existence of Jesus.
One of the most widely accepted arguments for believing he was real is that the Bible makes up a ridiculous census story that forces his parents to go to Bethlehem in order to fulfill the (misinterpreted) prophesy that the messiah would be born there. The argument is that he must have been real and born elsewhere for them to make up this dumb story.
so is xenu. by your logic if there's documentation it's gotta be evidence right?
Paul Bunyan is better documented lmao
I don't think you read your own link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Not sure what your argument is here. You own quote says that:
Nobody here is arguing that everything ever written about him is historical, just that he existed.
You clearly didn’t read the link either bud.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Plenty of scholars believe he didn't exist. Please check out Christ Before Jesus for more information.
There isn't a single definition here that backs your use of plenty
Also, do you have a link? I've searched a few databases and don't see a single paper called Christ Before Jesus. Or are you talking about the TikTok channel?
There is a TikTok channel as well as a book.
So nothing submitted and reviewed in an actual academic format? Otherwise "peer reviewed" holds no weight, because the peers could be other influencers, or those of actual scholarly credentials that all said "this is bad"