this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
907 points (96.4% liked)
Not The Onion
16013 readers
1132 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What you were talking about from the beginning had nothing to do with the comment of mine that you replied to. Stop going off topic.
You questioned the existence of Jesus the person. I corrected you on that. I cannot fathom how you can sort that into "has nothing to do with my comment".
You then went on to challenge mainstream historical science with weak arguments, started to talk about wonders and everything, getting religion all mixed up in things. Thus, in my last comment, I was explaining how religions get born, how they develop (briefly), to aid you in not mixing up a religion's history with what a religion says about itself.
Your reading comprehension must be really broken, because that's not at all what I said. I'm talking about Jesus teachings, the shit that's been reported on in the bible, the person that's in the bible. Not some random dude called Jesus that might've become the sockpuppet for Christianity. But again, I don't even believe that, I think you know full well what I meant and are just smart ass arguing in bad faith, because you continue to do so even after several clarifications which you continue to do mental gymnastics with. Honestly, just shut up and touch grass instead of further derailing this comment chain with your nonsensical brabbling about things that no one even cares about. If you want to make some sort of point for Christianity, then you're in the wrong place.
You said, quote:
He existed. That's all I'm saying. He probably taught something similar to what's in the Bible, it's unlikely to all have been bent by the faithful because that's not how religions work. People don't worship Ghandi and then put Stalin in their mouths, or the reverse.
Give me one single reason why Jesus' existence should be judged by a standard different to any of these other people:
Sokrates existed, and we're similarly unsure of what he taught -- but it's bound to have quite some resemblance to what Plato said about him.
Confucius also existed and we're absolutely sure of what he taught because he wrote it down.
With Buddha again it's similar to Jesus and Sokrates: The Pali canon definitely gets the gist of things.
Epictetus? We're damn sure of what he taught, not because he wrote it down but because we have other people's lecture notes.
Laozi didn't exist: The Dao de Jing existed in fragments before it was supposedly written in one go, and tales about his life are completely at odds with each other, and frankly speaking reek of extra chapters to the book. Though it's not entirely unlikely that it was compiled and polished by one guy, then published under pseudonym -- "The old master" yep that's rather obvious for a compilation of old sayings.
IDGAF about Christianity. Much, much less than you I even dare claim.
Alright, maybe talk to ChatGPT or something if you want to continue this, because I'm not into holding weird chatbot discussions with bots that clearly don't comprehend basic context.