Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor XIII
That oral tradition really has to develop remarkably fast. Mark is from 60 or so, as far as I recall, John, the last and completely unreliable one, is from 100. And supposedly he died around year 30. The tradition developing that fast, seems very, very unlikely to me. People seemingly actually believed that stuff to a very large extent, he was a dominant figure much more than a silly 'urban legend'. It does seem much less reasonable to me, than that someone existed.
@ tore: It in no way improves the evidence. But how much evidence do you want? You really can't expect to much evidence concerning a figure like Yeshua. So I don't think it makes sense to be too skeptical about it.
|
I was under the impression that christianity was an oppressed religion for a long time after Jesus's crucifixion. I don't know if you could call him a dominant figure. And also, earlier you cited the inconsistencies of witness accounts as evidence that they were true. I don't have a problem with that reasoning other than that much of the accounts are not eye witness but are written based on the eye witness accounts of others... and these accounts based on the same eye witnesses are often contradictory... which makes no sense.