You can then pretty much say that most classical history is made up since it’s just some accounts of people often written post-mortem.
Often in history from the time of the Roman Empire the sources are few and far between since it’d have to survive 2000 years to get to the present.
All we know is that suddenly a bunch of people starting talking about a rando in the desert called Jesus. Even though we don’t have an eye witness writing we have a person that spoke with the eye witnesses.
Then also, it’s just some letters he’s sending to a Christian community in modern day Turkey that happened to survive.
I’m an atheist but I feel the evidence is pretty solid for Jesus existing. Rest of it is exaggeration I think.
There is lots of physical archaeological evidence of her existence in the form of numerous contemporary relics, and there are numerous famous contemporary literary sources, and actual first hand accounts, where she is called a seductress.
Regarding Cleopatra we even have a decent idea how she looked. We know when she was born and when she died with good accuracy, we know she had an affair with Caesar. And we know who here parents and grandparents were.
If Jesus had just 1% the evidence of Cleopatra, there would be no doubt about his existence. And Jesus allegedly founded the biggest religion on earth, was the son of God, and performed numerous miracles. Yet crickets from everybody living in the area at the time, and stories first came out far removed in both time and distance from where they occurred.
You know almost or is it exactly like in a fairy-tale “In a country far far away long long ago…”.
I’m an atheist but I feel the evidence is pretty solid for Jesus existing.
Then show a single piece of solid evidence!! As it is, you are just parroting fundamental Christian rhetoric.
Of course there’s a lot of information about Cleopatra, she was married to the Consul of the Roman Empire and was the ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt. Of course documents on Jesus are going to be a lot more scarce.
Jesus was not a big name during his lifetime, he was literally just a random guy in the desert that led a cult. It’s hard enough to find data on literal Roman emperors during the crisis of the third century.
To get some data on Jesus you first need a guy that can write (rare), writing stuff on a person of little renown (very rare), that is predominantly followed by poor people (also rare), and for it survive 2000 years. I’m frankly surprised there is any data at all on him that’s this close to him being alive instead of people just writing down oral history like they did for rise of Muhammad.
I’m not saying that there is a lot of data but that there is some. I personally think it’s very plausible that there was a cult leader that essentially started Christianity. Oral history points to Jesus as well as second hand witnesses.
Other writings include Tacitus (known for being unbiased on his writing about roman emperors) writing on how he was crucified during Tiberius’ reign. Tacitus had access to a lot more data than we have and was a very competent historian.
I don’t believe he had any powers or was in any way magical godly or anything but Christian writings refer to him as well as Romans in a situation where it’s very plausible that a religion is started by a leader of some sort. I find it very likely that he existed.
There’s no smoking gun but all the guns are pointing in the same direction.
You can then pretty much say that most classical history is made up since it’s just some accounts of people often written post-mortem.
Often in history from the time of the Roman Empire the sources are few and far between since it’d have to survive 2000 years to get to the present.
All we know is that suddenly a bunch of people starting talking about a rando in the desert called Jesus. Even though we don’t have an eye witness writing we have a person that spoke with the eye witnesses.
Then also, it’s just some letters he’s sending to a Christian community in modern day Turkey that happened to survive.
I’m an atheist but I feel the evidence is pretty solid for Jesus existing. Rest of it is exaggeration I think.
That’s a whopping false equivalence, and actually must be regarded as an outright lie.
For instance Cleopatra lived before the time of the stories about Jesus:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/cleopatra-egypt-pharaoh-life-history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleopatra
There is lots of physical archaeological evidence of her existence in the form of numerous contemporary relics, and there are numerous famous contemporary literary sources, and actual first hand accounts, where she is called a seductress.
Regarding Cleopatra we even have a decent idea how she looked. We know when she was born and when she died with good accuracy, we know she had an affair with Caesar. And we know who here parents and grandparents were.
If Jesus had just 1% the evidence of Cleopatra, there would be no doubt about his existence. And Jesus allegedly founded the biggest religion on earth, was the son of God, and performed numerous miracles. Yet crickets from everybody living in the area at the time, and stories first came out far removed in both time and distance from where they occurred.
You know almost or is it exactly like in a fairy-tale “In a country far far away long long ago…”.
Then show a single piece of solid evidence!! As it is, you are just parroting fundamental Christian rhetoric.
Of course there’s a lot of information about Cleopatra, she was married to the Consul of the Roman Empire and was the ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt. Of course documents on Jesus are going to be a lot more scarce.
Jesus was not a big name during his lifetime, he was literally just a random guy in the desert that led a cult. It’s hard enough to find data on literal Roman emperors during the crisis of the third century.
To get some data on Jesus you first need a guy that can write (rare), writing stuff on a person of little renown (very rare), that is predominantly followed by poor people (also rare), and for it survive 2000 years. I’m frankly surprised there is any data at all on him that’s this close to him being alive instead of people just writing down oral history like they did for rise of Muhammad.
I’m not saying that there is a lot of data but that there is some. I personally think it’s very plausible that there was a cult leader that essentially started Christianity. Oral history points to Jesus as well as second hand witnesses.
Other writings include Tacitus (known for being unbiased on his writing about roman emperors) writing on how he was crucified during Tiberius’ reign. Tacitus had access to a lot more data than we have and was a very competent historian.
I don’t believe he had any powers or was in any way magical godly or anything but Christian writings refer to him as well as Romans in a situation where it’s very plausible that a religion is started by a leader of some sort. I find it very likely that he existed.
There’s no smoking gun but all the guns are pointing in the same direction.