4,994
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 14:
Line 14: − − But historical facts, or their absence, are irrelevant since we all know He existed. Historical sources and scientific facts are unnecessary.
Reverting "Historical sources and scientific facts are unnecessary" because I _think_ this is a hostile edit intended to caricature Conservapedia's point of view.
Many atheists claim that there is no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,{{fact}} but few scholars take this seriously. Historical evidence for Jesus is comparable to that of many historical personalities such as Caesar, Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, and Socrates, and many others. For example, Tacitus, the Roman historian, wrote about Jesus in 115 A.D. <ref>http://www.digisys.net/users/ddalton/evidence_of_jesus_outside_the_bible.htm</ref>, and Josephus, a Jewish historian who did not believe in Jesus' divinity, wrote about Him. <ref>http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jesusref.html</ref>.
Many atheists claim that there is no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,{{fact}} but few scholars take this seriously. Historical evidence for Jesus is comparable to that of many historical personalities such as Caesar, Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, and Socrates, and many others. For example, Tacitus, the Roman historian, wrote about Jesus in 115 A.D. <ref>http://www.digisys.net/users/ddalton/evidence_of_jesus_outside_the_bible.htm</ref>, and Josephus, a Jewish historian who did not believe in Jesus' divinity, wrote about Him. <ref>http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jesusref.html</ref>.
==References==
==References==
<references/>
<references/>