All the historical evidence for Jesus in one room

  • @afraid_of_zombiesOP
    link
    41 year ago

    Except we have evidence of those men existing and in the Socrates the story is believable enough and consistent and there is a direct eyewitness. We can’t say either about Jesus

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      The only evidence that Socrates existed are the writings of Plato. Socrates can also be interpreted as a purely Socratic device rather than a literal person.

      • @afraid_of_zombiesOP
        link
        01 year ago

        Which is more than what we can say about Jesus. Name a single eyewitness of him while he was alive who recorded it. Paul admits never seeing Jesus while he was alive, the twelve wrote no books, the Romans have no notes on the events. No one who supposedly saw any of the events managed to find quill and parchment. And what’s more no one who heard second hand during the events recorded it. The Gospels are clear that news was spreading all over Judea and yet people writing about other would be Messiahs and political rebellions are silent about Jesus.

        Besides, and again this important, Socrates is a consistent believable story. We don’t have multiple versions of his life that all go against each other, often within the same text.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean if you are going from the evidence of the Bible that you cannot corroborate from other records, then both Socrates and Jesus have exactly equal evidence for their physical existence.

          If it’s a consistent believable story, it could be because Plato wrote it that way. It isn’t a synthesis of dozens of writers drawing on thousands of oral traditions. It’s a single coherent voice of a single author with a clear vision of their character.