DOWN
Banned
?? There's more christians than any other religious peoples
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Who is the most famous person in human history?
- Thread starter Arc
- Start date
- Status
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Lister
Banned
False.
However, i would say he is more likely to have existed than not. By a smidgen. Or at least someone named something like joshua bar joseph, who was an itenerant preacher and got into trouble with the local authorities and at least in part inspired what became the cristian cult. Not exactly the guy the bible deacribes (mirackes not withstanding).
RoadHazard
Gold Member
There is about zero actual evidence for him ever having existed. There are a lot of stories about him, but that's true for Luke Skywalker as well.
Lovely Salsa
Banned
Correct me if Im wrong but jesus christ was first mentioned hundreds of years after he supposedly lived
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yep. There are no contemporary accounts of him. Nobody who's written about him actually lived when he did (not).
The earliest sources are after his life, yes, by roman historians. But I think its decades after, not centuries.
capitalCORN
Member
m_shortpants
Member
Probably Jesus, because he has a prominent part in Islam too.
autumnleaf
Member
There is more evidence than simply the stories in the Bible.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...cal-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died
Lovely Salsa
Banned
You'd think such an important figure would be mentioned while he was alive, or atleast shortly after his death
bonesmccoy
Banned
Inferno313
Banned
Nah, there are discovered writings from Christian sources about him that date to within ~25 years of his death. There are writings from non-christian sources that date to within ~60 or so years from his death.
I'm Spartacus
Member
15 pages and not one hint of a mention?
Though in all honesty, if we're discounting JC, it's probably Hitler
Though in all honesty, if we're discounting JC, it's probably Hitler
Skellig Gra
Member
Do you completely discount all oral traditions as a rule? The vast majority of the world was illiterate 2000 years ago.
It's not correct. Nero started to persecute Christians about 30-35 years after the date that the Crucifixion took place. Given that the Christian movement is centered on Christ himself, any fabrication of him would have had to have been almost immediately after the timeline of the purported events of his life.
The One and Done
Member
Jason Bourne
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Still not very impressive. Why are there no CONTEMPORARY writings about this amazing magical sorcerer? Seems like it should have been a pretty big deal at the time.
Yeah, but at the time he was not really an important figure, I mean, there were several guys that auto proclaimed themselves as messiah. The cult only gained popularity much later in time.
There were a lot of "magical sorcerers" at the time and several messiahs, he was just one of them. Life of Brian parodies this quite well.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
As evidence of anything? Yes. I don't believe in Thor and Odin either.
Jesus
EDIT: Oh shit now this is a thread about this subject and I didn't realize how late I was.
Herr Schwarz
Banned
I thought I covered this already. The only consensus is that Jesus was baptised, preached a bit and was crucified.
Those bits are the only consensus. And like I concluded there's a difference between Jesus the man. And astral Jesus from the bible.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
There is no scientific consensus that he ever existed at all. Look it up.
You're wrong, there are many accounts of him well under 100 years after he lived.
What? Scientific consensus? Why does that matter?
Do you know who studies the past? You're looking for historical consensus not scientific.
Inferno313
Banned
Much of the world was illiterate at the time, as Hollywood Duo just said. Plus, a lot of the writings that did exist in that time period haven't survived to the present day. Additionally, an important thing to consider is that none of the writings about Christ in the decades after his death, even the ones that take a negative tone towards Christian and Christ, suggest the notion that Christ might not've been a real person.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
So not while he lived then? You should look up the word "contemporary".
Skellig Gra
Member
I'm not even talking about religious stuff. Are all the Norse sagas fake? They were written down after the fact based on oral tradition.
I'd probably guess Genghis Khan before Hitler. I'm not certain how often Hitler would be evoked outside the anglosphere and I don't think an average American could name Hirohito if asked who lead Japan during the war (and I'm doubtful that eastern cultures like China would jump to Hitler for an immediate example of war crimes and not things like the Nanking Massacre).
If we're just going off World War II leaders I'd probably put Mao ahead of Hitler for infamy.
But everyone probably can think of Genghis Khan.
If we're just going off World War II leaders I'd probably put Mao ahead of Hitler for infamy.
But everyone probably can think of Genghis Khan.
Lovely Salsa
Banned
And thats all I really needed to know. I dont doubt for a second that vast majority of the people back then were stupid.
In some places in africa they still practice witchcraft and we all know how real that shit is
You responded to someone asking if the earliest accounts were written hundreds of years later with yes.
You should look up your own posts.
Inferno313
Banned
The majority of historians and scholars of antiquity generally agree that Jesus was a person that existed, that he was baptized by John the Baptist, and that he was crucified. "Looking it up" will give you that exact answer.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Whether they are or not, they're not evidence of anything. And that's what I'm saying: There is no evidence of Jesus having ever existed.
ClosingADoor
Member
Going by this line, about 90% if human history has no evidence.
Glirk-Dirka
Banned
Genghis Khan
We're not debating the power(s) of Jesus just his historical existence. There is enough evidence to say there was a historical Jesus.
I mean in terms of raw number of people that are aware of a person it would likely be someone from the last 20 years given that the world is more populated than ever, and pop culture reaches all corners of the globe.
If you were holding a picture of the person and walking around asking people who it was, I would say that you would get the most correct IDs with:
Michael Jackson
If you were holding a picture of the person and walking around asking people who it was, I would say that you would get the most correct IDs with:
Michael Jackson
Herr Schwarz
Banned
I mean what's the criteria of people having existed? Jesus DNA?
capitalCORN
Member
Would you tell your profession to find your sources? At the very least provide google evidence.
You really don't seem to know how historical evidence works. Especially since you seem to think it's somehow "scientific".
I have seen some really terrible ideas about the philosophy and methodology on GAF but this thread definitely takes the cake.
People in this thread arguing against his historicity aren't interested in the scholarship though. Why waste the effort. People have brought up plenty and its been summarily ignored. While at the same time unreachable expectations for pre-modern sources were given as the new goalposts.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
There is not. It's possible, but it's definitely not enough to say it with any certainty.
Lister
Banned
Lol, two paragraphs in and he's comparing Jesus to King Arthur. What a terrible aritcle.
Skellig Gra
Member
You do realize that all the history books written in ancient times were based on accounts from other people. They didn't witness everything first hand. So is all of non-modern history fake?
Airola
Member
Lol, no
Paul died in 67 AD and by then he had mentioned Jesus several times. There's no way anyone can say Jesus was first mentioned hundreds of years after him. He even hung out with Simon Peter, one of the OG apostles of Jesus. He was alive when Jesus was alive, not sure if he ever met him before, but he hung out with people who had lived with Jesus. I don't know how anyone could even entertain the thought of Jesus Christ being mentioned hundreds of years after.
Inferno313
Banned
I don't have time to seriously dig for this stuff right now, but this wikipedia page (Yeah, yeah. Wikipedia.) has a pretty good summary of this stuff, with multiple sources.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Science is really all you can go on if you want to claim anything with any certainty. We know evolution is real through science. We do not know whether Jesus ever existed. I'm not saying he definitely didn't - because I don't know! - I'm just saying there is no actual evidence for it.
You aren't even backpedaling well, but at least you've moved away from calling him fictional I suppose.
You are literally saying the entirety of the field of history is meaningless.
Get out of here with this positivistic garbage.
There are ways of knowing things besides science, which by the way derives its own legitimacy from a disciple outside of itself.
- Status