PugJesus@lemmy.worldM to A Comm for Historymemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 24 days agoAlways remember to flex on your discipleslemmy.worldimagemessage-square35linkfedilinkarrow-up1498arrow-down14
arrow-up1494arrow-down1imageAlways remember to flex on your discipleslemmy.worldPugJesus@lemmy.worldM to A Comm for Historymemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 24 days agomessage-square35linkfedilink
minus-squareocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up23arrow-down8·24 days agoAs often said, no academic argues Jesus was not a historical figure. Only militant terminally online atheists do.
minus-squareCyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up18arrow-down1·24 days agoI’m not talking about whether Jesus existed or not. The bible is not a historic accord is what I’m saying.
minus-squarebigFab@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·24 days agoStill, Simon/Peter could just as fine be as real as the person historically named Jesus. Assuming Jesus wasn’t talking to imaginary friends all day.
minus-squareocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·24 days agoThat’s not their point. Their point is the Bible isn’t a reliable source.
minus-squareocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down1·24 days agoGot you, no argument against that
As often said, no academic argues Jesus was not a historical figure. Only militant terminally online atheists do.
I’m not talking about whether Jesus existed or not. The bible is not a historic accord is what I’m saying.
Still, Simon/Peter could just as fine be as real as the person historically named Jesus. Assuming Jesus wasn’t talking to imaginary friends all day.
That’s not their point. Their point is the Bible isn’t a reliable source.
Got you, no argument against that