What proof does the movie give for a historical Jesus? Honest question..

You don't even know Josephus wasn't a Roman. Damn you're an idiot. He was a Jew dumbass. --- theunopeneddoor

+Otkon wrote:

They documented everything.

A Jesus lived. So what?

So only Christians care about arguments for Christianity?

Most Atheists in america were once Christians, and they cared about evidence for a historical Jesus.

Finding out that the Bible is the only "evidence" probably caused many deconversions. ;)

getting this stuff about Christ being a myth based on pagan deities

Your posts are nearly incoherent and so often self-contradictory. One moment you are claiming that there is zero evidence for the existence of Jesus outside of the Bible and then a few sentences later you are conceding that Jesus was indeed mentioned---and you even use that fact to change your claim to some other type of Jesus-denialism.

So I don't know if you are just playing games while trolling or if you simply get confused a lot. But for the sake of any readers who are genuinely curious and wishing to learn:

1) Jesus is among the best attested historical persons of the ancient world. If you don't believe it, start reading the textbooks and reference resources abounding at your local library.

2) "Jesus isnt even mentioned outside of the gospels...." Another lie. You could start by reading Tacitus in book 15, chapter 44.

(Of course, it is very difficult to determine how much of your trolling is based on pathological lying and how much is simple ignorance. My hunch is that you've been trolling for a long time on various forums as part of your obsession with Jesus, and so you've already been instructed on the historical realities. So even though you are likely ignorant in terms of ancient history education at even the undergraduate level, you've decided to lie about what you've learned along the way from those who corrected your ignorance.)

3) "...obviously he wasnt that important during his lifetime..."

Illogical and opined without any evidence or meaningful analysis. Just the trollings of a child hoping to get attention. (And if that quest for attention leads to the education of other readers who care about learning, that's fine with me. I used to have the occasional anti-Jesus hecklers in my R201 classes at a major midwestern public university. They actually served a useful didactic purpose because students were riveted to the resulting classroom debate. People tend to enjoy watching pesky insects being squashed.)

4) "...and only got famous centuries later."

History tells us otherwise. But if you are trying to articulate the lame Internet argument that because so many of the texts about Jesus were written well after his lifetime, that exposes even more ignorance of the study of the ancient world. VERY FEW historical persons of the ancient world are known to us through contemporary records. I'm not going to give you a remedial tutorial in a few paragraphs of a discussion forum but there are so many factors (many bordering on simple common sense) explaining why contemporary records of the ancients are so rare. Who told you that records from the ancient world are anything but RARE? How do you think their records were preserved? Who do you think devoted their lives to recopying and preserving the tiny percentage of remaining texts? It sounds like you would be surprised to learn just how few records we have attesting to the existence of Archimedes and Julius Caesar, for instance. And most personalities of the ancient world are known SOLELY from historians writing many centuries later!

I'm often amazed how often students assumed that papyrus books would have survived centuries of hungry insects and destructive molds. Egypt has a fortunate climate, from the perspective of the archaeologist, because the heat and extremely low humidity provided much more favorable storage conditions. But even then, libraries and repositories tend to burn down, whether in the course of periodic invasions or the inevitable accidents that come with urban living. (American genealogists are frustrated by missing census records resulting from a single fire that destroyed years of records in their entirety, and that was just a few years ago in modern times.)


Indeed, one of the funniest complaints I hear from anti-Jesus trolls is that "the Romans kept meticulous records and yet we have no record of Jesus' trial nor of his three years of alleged ministry in Palestine." I don't know whether to marvel at that incredible ignorance or the blatant dishonesty. Of course, most of the trollers against the existence of Jesus are teenagers and twenty-somethings with too much time on their hands. So it is often the educated retirees refuting them.

As for Rami-gilleanus, your self-contradictions and logical incoherencies are among the hazards of casual copy-and-paste trolling. If you want anyone to pay further attention to you, up your game and at least educate yourself on the basics of what historians do and how we gather information from the ancient world. Before I'll deal with your rubbish any further, you will need to come up with something mildly interesting rather than juvenile nonsense easily refuted by simple common sense.

You didn't miss anything.

Rami flounders around grabbing at one amateurish misunderstanding of the scholarship of historians and then another. He contradicts himself again and again. He can't seem to think in a straight line.

I too quit reading his nonsense. He needs to save up his pennies and attend a university and take an actual history course. Or read a book. (Imagine that!)