this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
235 points (82.5% liked)

Showerthoughts

29827 readers
557 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
quinten@lemmy.world
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
235
Even if god exists religion can't possibly be the way to god (lemmy.world)
submitted 5 months ago by bi_tux@lemmy.world to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
174 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

So I thought about this in the shower amd it makes sense to me, like praying and stuff never worked for most people I know, so a direkt link to god gotta be unlikely. That made me conclude that religion is probably fake, no matter if there's a god or not. Also people speaking to the same god being given a different set of rules sounds stupid, so at least most religions must be fake.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The best we have is letters from a whole generation after his death

Not really even "letters". But literally 2 accounts. One we're attributing doesn't even mention the correct name at the time. Jesus was often referenced as Yoshua at the time... So why the fuck did the account call him James? And the second account doesn't mention a name at all.

Edit: I need to clarify something since my phrasing is self-defeating (on purpose)... "often referenced as Yoshua at the time" as believed by biblical scholars who are almost universally religious. But the point remains. If the information we have now doesn't line up with what the accounts state (or the bible)... then how much of this shit is just made up bullshit?

And the 2 accounts are Tacitus (116 AD)

Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius

and Josephus Flavius (95 AD)

Testimonium Flavianum
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ.

And by the way... Josephus' account is under heavy scrutiny and is general considered unreliable at best... and downright forgery at worst. The wiki articles linked are a good read and well sourced.

A really damning case in my opinion is:

that although twelve Christian authors refer to Josephus before Eusebius in AD 324, none mentions the Testimonium.

So other early authors that were Christian referenced Josephus works, but ignore the one that actually mentions Jesus directly? That seems odd no? Almost like the work was fabricated AFTER 324AD.