Most antiquities scholars think that the New Testament gospels are "mythologized history." In other words, based on the evidence available they think that around the start of the first century a controversial Jewish rabbi named Yeshua ben Yosef gathered a following and his life and teachings provide...
  • rottingleaf@lemmy.zipEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    I mean, yeah. If you read something about gnostic non-Christian versions of Judaism existent at that time, you might notice that the whole idea of him is reminiscent of what a gnostic cult believer should be himself.

    The part about being a higher entity clothed in human existence which should remember itself, drop those clothes and ascend.

    Probably grew out of some story of “the guy who actually managed to do that”, ha-ha, which somehow blended with a few real figures.

    EDIT: Now when I think about it, makes Jedi religion in Star Wars seem even more Christian. Especially if we count various concepts (Journal of the Whills) and branches existent in the EU (Living Force, Potentium and what not).

  • weew@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Saying the Bible is based in history is kinda like saying Cocaine Bear is based on a true story

    In fact I’m pretty sure we have more evidence of Cocaine Bear’s existence

  • AnomalousBit@programming.devEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Jeez people, next you’re going to tell me the whole Jesus story is just a fucking rehash of other stories that already existed

      • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        11 months ago

        Seriously, Joshua? I’m willing to give you a pass for including a resurrection in your foundational myth, but this is… No one sees it happen, there’s nothing particularly impressive about it that stays afterwards, it’s just- some women find the corpse is no longer there, and they tell the men, and the men confirm that the corpse is indeed no longer there. What am I even suppose to do with this? It’s not just that you’re using the most tired trope there is, it’s that you don’t do ANYTHING with it. And I don’t mean anything new or innovative, I mean anything at all! What’s even the purpose of this resurrection? It even works against your narrative! You’re telling me that the father kills the son as a sacrifice for humankind, but then the son just resurrects? Then what’s even the point of the sacrifice? Does the son even have ANYTHING to do afterwards? No…?

        I’m sorry, Joshua, but I’m going to have to give you an F. This might have been interesting before Osiris or Zagreus, but you’re literally thousands of years late. Try better with your next religion.

  • HopingForBetter@lemmy.todayEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    I mean, in the book it even mentions that there are other people doing the exact same thing Jesus did. The book even implies that Jesus was not even one of the more popular trouble makers of the time. It’s more or less the sophists in a back-woods community that the Romans gave very little fucks about. Not surprising there’s little-to-no evidence.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      That much is obvious, if you read Lucian, street prophets with followers were a mundane thing to see.

      Actually now when the fine tradition of burning heretics is all but gone in the European cultures, this trait of Antique Mediterranean is slowly coming back.