Could also be an amalgamation of multiple people of a particular movement or philosophy. This happens a lot when you adapt a book to a movie, for example and you end up with characters that are a combination of characters from the original text.
The non-Christian sources that are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus are Josephus (a Jewish historian and commander in Galilee) and Tacitus (a Roman historian and Senator).
Not that many independent sources actually. The best evidence for me is that if he didn’t exist then why make up the ridiculous Roman census Nazareth story?
You are of course free to dismiss all of the sources and have your own opinion, that’s perfectly fine, but do acknowledge that you would be going against established scientific consensus.
That evidence seems sufficient. Not sure why you would assume I would dismiss good evidence. I guess that is common, but I am strictly rational as far as I know.
That’s incorrect. Virtually all scholars agree that Jesus was a real historical figure, based on many non-religious sources.
Of course most of the stories about him are made up, but the scientific consensus is that he existed.
Could also be an amalgamation of multiple people of a particular movement or philosophy. This happens a lot when you adapt a book to a movie, for example and you end up with characters that are a combination of characters from the original text.
Yeah I dunno about “many”
Definitely enough for a whole separate Wikipedia article to list them all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_historicity_of_Jesus
From that article:
So two. Not “many”.
That’s what the article calls “key sources”. There are many more below (Mara bar Serapion, Suetonius, The Talmud, and more under “minor sources”).
Not that many independent sources actually. The best evidence for me is that if he didn’t exist then why make up the ridiculous Roman census Nazareth story?
There are so many sources that there is more evidence for his existence than for any other person living at the time.
This article mentions at least 14 independent sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_historicity_of_Jesus
You are of course free to dismiss all of the sources and have your own opinion, that’s perfectly fine, but do acknowledge that you would be going against established scientific consensus.
That evidence seems sufficient. Not sure why you would assume I would dismiss good evidence. I guess that is common, but I am strictly rational as far as I know.