Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: 'Jesus's Wife' papyrus fragment not a forgery, scientists say [View all]antiquie
(4,299 posts)27. I'm not a scholar and rely too heavily on wiki.
I thought he was a real man, possible cult leader, later mythologized.
(source)
Most modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. There is a significant debate about his nature, his actions and his sayings, but most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7-4 BC and died 3036 AD, that he lived in Galilee and Judea and did not preach or study elsewhere, and that he spoke Aramaic and perhaps also Hebrew and Greek.
Uh oh, I just realized this is LBN, I gotta shut my trap.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
95 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
wait until they find out that the world is round, that will shake them up for sure.
olddad56
Apr 2014
#15
9th century too late to be of any use unless proven to be a copy of something from first century
on point
Apr 2014
#6
Even the four "main" Gospels were written decades after his death, weren't they?
nomorenomore08
Apr 2014
#94
A 4th century date would compare with the earliest copies we have of the New Testament . . .
another_liberal
Apr 2014
#62
It wasn't written to be a documentary, but try telling that to the literalists. n/t
winter is coming
Apr 2014
#18
intersting contention, that if your spirituality doesn't align with christianity,
olddad56
Apr 2014
#52
'I point out to them that nowhere in the collection of religious writings we call the "Bible"
FiveGoodMen
Apr 2014
#91
There is not too much "contemporaneous" evidence of Plato, either. I'm an atheist, but the attacks
Texas Lawyer
Apr 2014
#70
I think that is a fair statement. Many ancient if not most ancient Biblical figures and events have
Douglas Carpenter
Apr 2014
#76
I'd say 'evidence' for Plato is considerably stronger than for Jesus of Nazareth ...
brett_jv
Apr 2014
#85
Yes - I was pointing to a copy that is physically from the 2nd century
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2014
#68
Far as I know, you have to be married today in order to be a rabbi. n/t
Benton D Struckcheon
Apr 2014
#35
Many Buddhists believe that Jesus studied the Lotus Sutra, which Shakyamumi (AKA "the Buddha")
DesertDiamond
Apr 2014
#34
Patanjali's "Yoga Aphorisms" lists the results of increasingly deep levels of meditation.
KittyWampus
Apr 2014
#81
They only believe what they choose to. It will be like it never happened.
rehabanderson
Apr 2014
#50