Which Jesus are we talking about? The Nazirite preacher who developed a cult following, or the Son of God who cured lepers with his touch and resurrected dead people?
One of these things is plausible, but not provable beyond all reasonable doubt. The other is just magic and shit.
So I'm wondering where your absolute, rock-solid conviction on this matter is coming from.
And it totally makes sense that there would be such a guy, probably a grifter, manipulator, sociopath, who would develop such a cult.
Because the alternative is that some group in power conspired to spin this story and astroturf the movement. So that would have to be either the Jews or the Romans. But it doesn’t benefit either of them to do that.
Nope. The so-called historical sources are all Romans, Christians, and Roman Christians. No physical evidence, of course
In other words, the whole "Jesus objectively existed" is based solely on the testimony of people with a vested interest in his existence, none of whom were even alive at the time he supposedly was.
18 replies
Not everyone knows how to do everything
True. Even if he DID exist and WAS a god, he couldn't possibly be omnipotent unless he was not omniscient, not benevolent, or neither 🤷🏻
For a brief time, with cross on his back, Jesus Christ was Carrie Underwood.
He’s been hanging on rear view mirrors long enough, I’m sure he’s figured it out by now.
By that metric, you'd have better luck asking a pine tree to be your chauffeur
..is a brand new sentence for sure 😄
If Jesus is God and god is omniscient, he knows. If god is omnipotent, he can.
Still, people die, so if the above is true, he's evil.
Waymo disagrees
This has to be an instant favorite of mine. Respect
Awww, I kinda feel bad for Jesus. Don't put him in this position.
But He is God, and is supposed to be omniscient.
That guy yells
Jesus existed lol
Which Jesus are we talking about? The Nazirite preacher who developed a cult following, or the Son of God who cured lepers with his touch and resurrected dead people?
One of these things is plausible, but not provable beyond all reasonable doubt. The other is just magic and shit.
So I'm wondering where your absolute, rock-solid conviction on this matter is coming from.
And it totally makes sense that there would be such a guy, probably a grifter, manipulator, sociopath, who would develop such a cult.
Because the alternative is that some group in power conspired to spin this story and astroturf the movement. So that would have to be either the Jews or the Romans. But it doesn’t benefit either of them to do that.
Shit-tier Socrates, that is who I am talking about. Just another human executed for speaking out.
The difference is that one of these figures avoided unjustified assertions. Both likely existed.
Nope. The so-called historical sources are all Romans, Christians, and Roman Christians. No physical evidence, of course
In other words, the whole "Jesus objectively existed" is based solely on the testimony of people with a vested interest in his existence, none of whom were even alive at the time he supposedly was.