Note: You are not restricted by language. You gain the ability to temporarily understand and speak their language.

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You are combining the argument from embarrassment with your older argument from poverty.

    The argument from poverty doesn’t work because it assumes that humans get what they want. As I stated the vast majority of criminals are not successful people. Gallie was poor, a rural backwater of a backwater of an open air prison. James and Peter could do some preaching and make just enough off the suckers to keep going. They did flee Jerusalem which says enough. Literally couldn’t convince people to believe what they had personally witnessed? No one remembers the king of the Jews being killed right during this major holiday? If someone died on the field of the next Superbowl would you remember that?

    No. Far more likely they left John the Baptist, setup shop in Jerusalem. We’re told to get lost. Fleed back to Gallie and tried again. Later on Paul comes along and wtf he is taking this seriously.

    The argument from embarrassment also doesn’t work because Jews had plenty of leaders who were killed for what they did. Jeremiah and Samson for example. In fact a dead leader killed can be a source of strength. Almost all of religion is telling people that weakness is strength and who is more weak than someone dead? Someone who didn’t even manage to die of old age. Someone who was killed.

    Also I never said Paul didn’t buy into it, I think he did. If nothing else the Eucharist. This ritual that must have boiled the blood of every monotheistic person who heard about it.

    • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s easy to let your imagination run to whatever it likes. What you’re not doing it showing how your idea reasonably links into the text and traditions that we have from the era.

      Can you cite any academic sources that support what you’re saying?

      I leave you with (secular) Bart Ehrman:

      “He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on certain and clear evidence.” B. Ehrman, 2011

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see. So because a famous person said X it must be X. Statements accuracy is based on whom uttered them and not what the evidence shows.

        Can you cite a single Christian authority that support what you are claiming? That Jesus was not supernatural and no one saw a physical resurrection.

        • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I see. So because a famous person said X it must be X

          Are you new at this? This is too obvious a strawman…

          Can you cite a single Christian authority that support what you are claiming? That Jesus was not supernatural and no one saw a physical resurrection.

          See the 1st century Ebionites

          Not interested in discussing with you any further