• Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    4 months ago

    You realize that a significant portion of the bible is the collected letters and works that were at the time (that it was assembled) considered credible, right?

    There’s a period of around 80 years that’s pretty hard to account for, but unlike the four gospels where there’s little corroborating evidence that tracks back into that 80 year period, the epistolary works are pretty likely to be authentic. They also reference a bunch of other letters that didn’t survive, something that tends to make them more likely authentic than not. And they involve people who were eyewitnesses of a man named Jesus (or Joshua or Yeshua if you prefer) and his younger (step) brothers.

    The rest of the statements about him were solidified by 80 years or so after his death, but all the accounts don’t quite line up — which is actually a good argument for them being based on actual events.

    So while there may be plenty of room for debate as to how much of the biblical teachings actually originated with a man named Jesus, his actual existence seems more evident than, say, Shakespeare.

    • JesterIzDead@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      The mental gymnastics is palpable. That things don’t line up is evidence they’re true? And because people believed it at the time it must be credible? Did a guy really live in the belly of a whale for three days simply because some simpletons believed it?

      • arefx@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Of course not because it’s a load of hogwash. Go play telephone with a class of 6th graders for 5 minutes and then tell me these stories are accurate. Also the events in most of them are clearly impossible situations.

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s how epistemological analysis works… if the general structure is the same but everyone pulls different meaning out of an event, something probably happened. If everything lines up exactly, someone probably faked the letters. If there’s totally conflicting stories, the record has been tampered with too much to say anything. If there’s no record, there’s nothing to say one way or another.

        • JesterIzDead@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          I suppose the burden of proof would have to be that low to believe something so ridiculous

    • harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Assembled a thousand years after the fact by a group with a vested interest in solidifying the narrative to fit their own.

      Hell, the Tanakh didn’t really get put together until well after Christianity appeared and it was a reaction to Christians appropriating Jewish literary culture to establish their own.

      It’d be similar to people a thousand years from believing that Christian Gray is literally descended from Edward and Bella.