Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Why do certain theists try to deflect questions regarding the historical accuracy of Jesus by bringing up other historical figures?
Like Socrates.
1) Whether Socrates, in this example, existed or not has no bearing on whether Jesus existed.
2) There were no claims that Socrates was the son of a god so the existence of a philosopher doesn't seem like much of a stretch.
3) Nobody has suggested that failing to believe in Socrates will subject the nonbeliever to eternal damnation.
It is too much to ask for these certain these theists to play on an even playing field?
@ Scott but Jesus doesn't have nearly the same historical evidence as many other historical figures. There are only three non-christian sources to speak of
10 Answers
- Anonymous6 years ago
Atheists need to built a time machine and go back into the past to witness Jesus for themselves.
The burden is on atheists to built the time machine because being a theist means it's impossible to be a scientist according to atheists.
- Anonymous6 years ago
Because no atheist is stupid enough to deny the historical accuracy of other figures, so it is pure idiocy to deny the man who has more historical authentication than any other.
- Jim VLv 76 years ago
I don't know what you mean by "deflection".
But the material in regard to Jesus is MUCH closer to his time and vastly outweighs that for Socrates. So, if you believe that Socrates was a real person, then it is antithetical to say that Jesus was not.
Re Update 1:
1) That is true. The point is that there is more source material for Jesus than Socrates.
2) True
3) True
I don't see anything wrong with the field.
- Anonymous6 years ago
The Christ myth is not accepted by historians. It seems its adherents have stricter standards than historians, thus bringing up other historical characters know only through the writings of others. The Wikipedia article on Christ Myth contains an outlining of the debunking of your thesis.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- G CLv 76 years ago
There is no historical inaccuracy of Jesus, so why worry about it? It is a recorded historical fact, no longer up for debate.
- wombatfreaksLv 76 years ago
The belief in Jesus is based on faith, that is what is asked and required. There is no historical evidence of his existence, nor will there ever be. If proof existed, everyone would believe, then faith would have no value. Yet faith is what is required.
- Scott BLv 76 years ago
Because it seems the standard by which other historical figures are deemed valid seems to be higher for Jesus than for others.
- Anonymous6 years ago
Do you know which ones are doing this? I don't doubt there was a Jesus, I just wonder if they got the right one. Don't forget he had the power to replicate himself.
- Anonymous6 years ago
Apostles made up Jesus. The Pope and all succeeding Popes made up Jesus.
Saints who were martyred made up Jesus
Constantine the Great made up Jesus
and Charlemagne made up Jesus.
Mu7ammed also made up Jesus.
.
Martin Luther made up Jesus.
Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo Buonarotti made up Jesus.
Ferdinand Magellan and Christopher Columbus made up Jesus.
Gandhi claims to know how Jesus is.
...
Americans who swear after an accident and say "Jesus Christ" made up Jesus.
Mel Gibson made up Jesus.
...
people with crosses marked on their graveyards made up Jesus.
You must be the Supreme Judge in discrediting history, and people's lives. But it doesn't matter. You probably see them as hordes. And that by some miracle you were born into this world to point this out.
- Anonymous6 years ago
it's an effective way of exposing Atheist hypocracy
