I asked a question earlier today regarding why historians tend to agree on the existence of a historical Jesus, and received several answers suggesting I'm a crazed fundamentalist lunatic for even considering the possibility that a story that sounds like a work of fiction derived from OT exegesis, might actually be a work of fiction derived from OT exegesis.
The evidence of a historical Jesus is simply not overwhelming, and a lot of puzzles are greatly simplified without such an assumption, so why is it not valid to question it?
2007-12-21
15:51:31
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Religion & Spirituality