Lately I’ve heard people attacking the veracity of the fairy tale book with statements like “Jesus wasn’t real” or it was a psy op operation by the Romans that got out of control. And I hate talking about reddit but it’s basically the atheism mods policy over there that Jesus wasn’t real.

I usually rely on the Wikipedia as my litmus test through life, which shouldn’t work in theory but is great in practice:

Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Virtually all scholars agree that a Jewish man called Jesus of Nazareth did exist in Palestine in the 1st century CE. The contrary perspective, that Jesus was mythical, is regarded as a fringe theory.

Edit: My suggestion to any who would like to see my opinion changed (see above quote) is to get on the Wikipedia and work towards changing the page. My upvote goes to Flying Squid for reminding us “does not matter at all because that’s not who Christians worship”

Edit 2: practicality changed to practice

  • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.worldEnglish
    52·
    8 months ago

    Yes, but that’s not the same as claiming knowledge of the non-existence of a person from 2000 years ago, or rejecting the premise that some real person could have been the basis for the surreal stories about them. By all means criticize the believers, reject the merit of the book, and hold the question of the reality of a human Jesus as irrelevant or pointless. Just don’t put forth a gnostic claim of his non-existence when you cannot know that for a fact.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        8 months ago

        As I said, that’s fine. I also agree that the existence or non-existence of a human that is the basis for the Jesus figure is irrelevant. What’s a problem is when people claim knowledge that they don’t have. It’s perfectly acceptable to not hold a belief without asserting to know that the belief is untrue. I can not believe that Jesus was a real person without asserting that he wasn’t.