jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (16 posts)

Does Jesus have the most comprehensive genealogy of any historical figure?

  1. Oztinato profile image71
    Oztinatoposted 8 months ago

    Does Jesus have the most comprehensive genealogy of any historical figure?

    Many authentic historical figures have a paltry amount of actual genealogical evidence. Out of all such historical figures it appears that Jesus has the most complete details of his personal genealogy in history via the Old and New Testaments. This proves by standard archaeological practice that Jesus existed. When added to the holistic seismic shifts in historical events after his life, his existence is the most solidly proved fact in history.

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13590167_f260.jpg

  2. Aime F profile image83
    Aime Fposted 7 months ago

    Mmmmm nope. The old and new testaments aren't what I'd consider to be reliable resources.

    1. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Do you have a degree in Archaeology or Ancient History or do you just "have a feeling" about it.

    2. Aime F profile image83
      Aime Fposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      No, but I do have a science degree which required knowing what constitutes reputable sources and the bible does't fit the bill.

    3. Justin Earick profile image83
      Justin Earickposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      It is on you to prove your assertion, not on someone else to prove their credentials. Try again.

    4. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Fortunately literature is an art and not a science and history is recorded in "books" and relics. A legal document that ratifies other legal documents is very solidly and legally "real".

    5. Aime F profile image83
      Aime Fposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Wow, so Daenerys Targaryen is real? That's great news! I wonder if she knows Jay Gatsby or Holden Caulfield, they must be real too. Cuz like, they were people written in books and apparently that's an acceptable proof of existence now.

    6. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      The only people who take the entire Bible literally are low IQ fundamentalists and low IQ atheists. The Bible is a small library of history and allegory. Ancient literary forms have little to do with modern novels.

  3. Justin Earick profile image83
    Justin Earickposted 7 months ago

    The mythical character Jesus of Nazareth never existed in human form. The New Testament was written to fit the Old Testament predictions long after Jesus would have existed, and the church picked and chose which scriptures to include and exclude from the christian bible over a thousand years after that. There were many historians in Jesus' supposed time and location, yet somehow only 12 randos noticed the guy going around supposedly raising people from the dead and not a single historian. The biblical description of the stars would mean that Jesus would have been born in the spring, not December; each gospel gives a different account of who discovered Jesus' empty tomb along with Mary...the scriptures can't even keep the Jesus con going straight. There was no Jesus. There was no Moses (University of Tel Aviv can attest, look it up). There was no David, Solomon, Arbraham, Noah, etc.
    The Prophet Muhammad on the other hand, was an actual person who existed in real life (though he was a terrible murderer who convinced people that god conveniently wanted him to take all of the women he could for himself)
    Btw I love that you think the christian bible is an historical text. Let me guess...god put fossils here to test your faith? lolololololol

    1. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I hate to break this too you but the Bible is often used by archeologists and historians. It also still appears in every court room in "the West" as an authoritative document.
      It is made up of allegory, parable, literature and history.

    2. Justin Earick profile image83
      Justin Earickposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      No, it is not. The bible says there was a great flood, plagues, passover...none of those things happened. The bible is a collection of fairy tales strung together to fit the narrative of people who want to control your behavior and take your money.

    3. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I have a degree in archaeology and I can assure you it is. Your emotional objections to facts have nothing to do with history. Genealogies of far less accuracy are used to prove historical personages.

    4. jonnycomelately profile image82
      jonnycomelatelyposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Very little, if any, of that allegory or literature  is relevant to us 2000 yrs. later. If it's history, prove it. Surely a good looking man like that "Jesus" would have married and borne children. And his brothers/sisters/grand kids likewise.

    5. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      JFK
      The fact is there is more proof that JC existed than many other historical figures where evidence is paltry in comparison. JC is mentioned in both ancient Jewish and islamic documents. Allegories need to interpreted not just translated.

    6. goatfury profile image91
      goatfuryposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      OP, did you just come here to argue, or were you actually trying to solicit feedback?  Because you've gotten frank, honest answers to your question, and then disregarded each and every response.

    7. Oztinato profile image71
      Oztinatoposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      I certainly haven't disregarded any responses. I have set the record straight about misinformation. Historically speaking JCs genealogy is actually the best in ancient history. I'm curious about atheists emotional responses to this fact.

 
working