Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Does anyone here think the Nativity is not pure myth? [View all]guillaumeb
(42,649 posts)41. And historians agree that Jesus was crucified for sedition.
And Palestine was controlled by the Romans. And the Romans reserved crucifixion for persons convicted of sedition. This story you mention, the supposed guilt of the Jews, is one of the roots of anti-Semitism.
But this is not the actual point, which concerns the historicity of Jesus.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
56 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Four gospels, four different birth treatments. The message was more important than fact.h
Karadeniz
Dec 2019
#5
That was why I said "treatments." Mark doesn't give a birth story, so apparently the birth was
Karadeniz
Dec 2019
#25
"Historians in general agree that there was an historical Jesus who preached in Palestine"
Cuthbert Allgood
Dec 2019
#37
I think we cannot make such firm conclusions given how little information we have
Steelrolled
Dec 2019
#33