This would get you laughed out of the room in any scholarly situation. Virtually no scholar, atheist or otherwise, agrees with this. Not even Ehrman.
broken telephone
More ignorance. Textual criticism is nothing like the telephone game. The synoptics in particular are dated to the same generation in which Jesus lived. Mark in particular is virtually certainly not written later than thirty years after Jesus. Probably much, much sooner. There's actually a good case for seven years.
We have more textual references to the New Testiment than to any other ancient work and it's not even remotely close. Something like 500k+ textual artifacts. And that's not counting references included in early church letters. You'd be more likely to be correct saying Alexander the Great never existed. The first textual reference we have for him is Quintus Curtius Rufus 400 years after Alexander died.
Yes Jesus almost certainly existed. The view that he didn't is very very fringe among historians. Of the few that assert that he never existed (the mythicists), I've read some of their stuff and am simply not convinced.
The real debate surrounds what Jesus actually said and did. That makes for fun investigation.
He kicked the "money changers" out of the church. Compare that with any jewish temple. And how are jews "his disciples"? Aren't the followers of christ's called.... Christians?
Anyone who believes in firmaments is low IQ with a mentality stuck in 1475.
Jesus is the truth, the sooner you accept that the better. All the tv ever done for you is lie.
Jesus never existed.. fake fairytales passed down like broken telephone.... Flat earth would be more believable.. yet is bs as well.
This would get you laughed out of the room in any scholarly situation. Virtually no scholar, atheist or otherwise, agrees with this. Not even Ehrman.
More ignorance. Textual criticism is nothing like the telephone game. The synoptics in particular are dated to the same generation in which Jesus lived. Mark in particular is virtually certainly not written later than thirty years after Jesus. Probably much, much sooner. There's actually a good case for seven years.
We have more textual references to the New Testiment than to any other ancient work and it's not even remotely close. Something like 500k+ textual artifacts. And that's not counting references included in early church letters. You'd be more likely to be correct saying Alexander the Great never existed. The first textual reference we have for him is Quintus Curtius Rufus 400 years after Alexander died.
At least make an effort to be informed.
Yes Jesus almost certainly existed. The view that he didn't is very very fringe among historians. Of the few that assert that he never existed (the mythicists), I've read some of their stuff and am simply not convinced.
The real debate surrounds what Jesus actually said and did. That makes for fun investigation.
This guy is a jew. Don't listen. To jews talk about Jesus. Jesus wasn't a fan of feminine men or thieves so that why he hated the jews
So he hated his own disciples, and himself?
I don't really recall Jesus hating anyone in the Gospels.
He kicked the "money changers" out of the church. Compare that with any jewish temple. And how are jews "his disciples"? Aren't the followers of christ's called.... Christians?