Some people say yes, some say no. Christians, agnostics, and atheists on all sides. I hope that answers your question.
To be fair, if someone said Jesus never existed, they clearly wouldn’t be Christian 🤣
It really isn’t so clearcut. You don’t need an actual Jesus for the words attributed to him to be true. “Jesus” works perfectly fine as a container for an idea.
Thing is, it goes against man’s desires. The other religions that took off generally allow men to take more than one wife, fight wars, etc. Christianity basically asks of one to be poor and selfless and pure
That doesn’t work. Either there is physical proof or there is none. Afaik the latter is correct.
Ehhhhhh, you probably aren’t trying to be technical, but it’s worth noting that circumstancial evidence is definitely a thing; is evidence that suggests but doesn’t definitively state. As mentioned in this tread, Nero calls out pilate for executing Jesus. There’s also the often overlooked circumstancial evidence that there’s a whole ass religion to the guy, which sure there are other religions etc etc, but most of them don’t have a semi Devine being that you can point to specific dates and times…
I will continue on, I’m an atheist, so I’m not arguing for Christianity, so here’s obligatory circumstancial evidence against historical J.
Wasn’t a census when he was supposed to be born. No written accounts of Herod executing every baby boy in Judea. Etc etc lmgtfy if you need it
The Nero reference you are mentioning was written by Tacitus over a century after he was supposed to have lived. The fact of the matter js that there is no contemporary primary rvidence of hus exisrence.
