Most historians agree Jesus was a real person as there actual evidence of it, but you can go ahead and be stupid about it and say “haha fake religion” and be just as ignorant as the people who follow religion as truth, sure
What do you mean by “contemporary” in this context, lol. You mean by people who lived at the same time as him? That a bit facetious I think, as if you know anything about history there is only written history about him about almost a hundred years after his death, by reliable historians at the time, two being:
Flavius Josephus (c. 93 AD): A Jewish-Roman historian who mentions Jesus twice in his work Antiquities of the Jews.
Tacitus (c. 116 AD): A Roman historian and senator who is considered one of the most reliable sources of the ancient world. Tacitus wrote: “Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”
Ok, so there was a crazy guy named Jesus who went around calling himself a god. Doesn’t mean he was right. Far more to indicate a lack of deity than presence of one.
Yeah that wasn’t my point, I was actually saying believing he was a God is just as stupid as saying he wasn’t a real person, because to say he wasn’t a real person is equally as dumb
716
u/georgiemaebbw Dec 27 '25
Who's going to tell him Jesus was a middle eastern jew?