• @MothmanDelorian
    link
    04 hours ago

    I have offered a source with multiple linked sources that explains why this consensus exists. If you choose to ignore that consensus of experts you are choosing to not accept what people who have spent decades working on this question which is your right but IMO is rarely the wise choice when you are uneducated on the subject.

    What’s the proof fir this amalgamation idea you are claiming and how of you explain thousands of people all across that part of the world having the same beliefs and names for Jesus within 3-4 decades of his death and please remember this is 2000 years ago so news travelled slowly.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      03 hours ago

      I have offered a source with multiple linked sources that explains why this consensus exists.

      It doesn’t exist, though. And, if it did, it’s consensus without basis.

      In reality, any consensus that may exists, does so purely due to environment. Why are we trying to even prove the existence of such a person? Because it’s the dominant religious belief in this country. I’m sure just as much consensus around the existence of Mythras the man exists, too.

      What’s the proof fir this amalgamation idea you are claiming and how of you explain thousands of people all across that part of the world having the same beliefs and names for Jesus within 3-4 decades of his death and please remember this is 2000 years ago so news travelled slowly.

      Because that’s how cults start? Shit, have you seen how quickly Scientology has grown? Does Xenu actually exist?

      News in the Roman empire took… well, as long as it took to walk from city to city. And the cultists were adamant about spreading the word. 100 years after the guy lived, of course.

      • @MothmanDelorian
        link
        03 hours ago

        The basis fir the consensus was explained. You clearly did not understand that.

        So you have nothing to substantiate your counter claim to the one presented by historians and you think your claim has validity? That isnt how any of this works.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 hours ago

          The basis fir the consensus was explained.

          Yes, I get it. The basis for consensus was “It’s the dominant religion, so it must be fact”.

          By the same basis, Hercules existed.

          So you have nothing to substantiate your counter claim

          It’s not my job to prove someone’s conclusions. The onus for the evidence of existence lays with the person making the claim. And it’s very clearly stated: There is no evidence. The best we got are some documents written by biased sources, half a century after the fact.