Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
They aren't binary options.
For example, it's also possible that there was a real person, but that then a lot of biographical details were added in and made up.
But it's quite unlikely that the entire story is made up, in large part because of how much of the narrative is dealing with trying to claim that other people are wrong about it.
The earliest records are from a guy known to his audience as persecuting Jesus's followers. Who then complains that his audience has accepted a different version of Jesus.
The earliest canonical narratives in Peter's own tradition are trying to explain why he was present in the area where a trial that required bringing witnesses before the accused where two or more needed to agree for testimony to be considered was reportedly denying him there.
You simply don't see details like that with made up supernatural narratives. Where's the story about Mithras keeping his status secret and only making claims of being a promised savior in private? In the story where Dionysus is captured by pirates is there a weird line about someone running down the street butt naked?
The earliest texts in the Christian corpus have very odd nuances compared to pretty much all other fully fictional traditions we're aware of, but those nuances are in line with what we see with more modern cults around a figure who ends up dead or imprisoned where there's then competing splits thereafter.
It is very, very unlikely the accounts are 100% true, even in matters separate from the magic stuff. They are even outright at odds with each other. For example, John 18:20 makes a claim nothing was said in secret but the Synoptics all have secret explanations for at least the sower parable.
But the idea there was no historical individual at the kernel of it all is quite unlikely as well. There's too much evidence the first century tradition is battling over the details of a record regarding a real centralizing figure that does not occur with synecretized or fabricated mythos.
Just because L Ron Hubbard was not a great war hero as Scientology claims does not imply there was no historical person named L Ron Hubbard founding the tradition that later made stuff up about him.
I didn't mean to imply otherwise, I'm sure there were real people. I just don't see why anyone would insist it's one person, this being quite common at the time (in name and deeds and prophecy).
Do I think that they (or one of them) had real powers to raise the dead and heal the sick? No. I also don't think that the moon was cut in half by Mohamed, or that Moses parted the Red Sea; I don't think any of these Abrahamic tales are real actual events...
But I would love to see any evidence to the contrary, and am always trying to learn more.
Well some of the mythos is almost certainly pulling things in from elsewhere. Even just the way the canonical gospels (likely) add events to fulfill old testament prophecy, such as the dividing of clothes.
But I'd be fairly surprised if the tradition conflicts were regarding multiple different Jesuses vs a single Jesus that was being fought over.
For example, the Jesus ben Panthera vs Jesus ben Joseph vs Jesus ben Stada conflict seems very much to be disputes over the ancestral lineage of a single figure than accounts of totally different figures. Notably, a son of a Roman soldier (ben Panthera) or an unfaithful woman (ben Stada) does not have a claim on being the messiah. Complicating that debate is that Joseph is never even mentioned in Mark, which has the claim of being the messiah only said in secret not in public.
Sounds like Paul Bunyan to me lol, lots of debate over the nuances of his life too
If Jesus didnt exist as the son of god then what does it matter? Santa isnt Saint Nicholas and Jesus Christ isnt whatever historical julio you want to project onto why are we even entertaining this bullshit? There is no historical Jesus because there is no Jesus Christ, it's not more complicated than that.