[38 / 8 / ?]
Quoted By: >>21481267 >>21481274 >>21481277 >>21481280 >>21481281 >>21481288 >>21481289 >>21481292 >>21481293 >>21481294 >>21481297
This is a thing.
I'm convinced they're doing it with Jesus. They are deliberately using the logical fallacy equivocation to confuse people.
1) Jesus, the story, the mythological character
2) Jesus, the historical person upon whose life and teachings the Bible was very loosely based
These are two different things. Historians know this. Wikipedia says they make a distinction. And yet wikipedia, and many other sources, keep lumping these two different things into one word "Jesus" in the same sentences, the same arguments etc, committing the logical fallacy equivocation, BY DESIGN. And that's why you see a lot of people saying "even secular historians/scholars believe that Jesus was a historical person", they don't understand the manipulation that's going on.
>Today scholars agree that a Jewish man named Jesus of Nazareth did exist in the Herodian Kingdom of Judea and the subsequent Herodian tetrarchy in the 1st century AD, upon whose life and teachings Christianity was later constructed,[note 1] but a distinction is made by scholars between 'the Jesus of history' and 'the Christ of faith'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation
I'm convinced they're doing it with Jesus. They are deliberately using the logical fallacy equivocation to confuse people.
1) Jesus, the story, the mythological character
2) Jesus, the historical person upon whose life and teachings the Bible was very loosely based
These are two different things. Historians know this. Wikipedia says they make a distinction. And yet wikipedia, and many other sources, keep lumping these two different things into one word "Jesus" in the same sentences, the same arguments etc, committing the logical fallacy equivocation, BY DESIGN. And that's why you see a lot of people saying "even secular historians/scholars believe that Jesus was a historical person", they don't understand the manipulation that's going on.
>Today scholars agree that a Jewish man named Jesus of Nazareth did exist in the Herodian Kingdom of Judea and the subsequent Herodian tetrarchy in the 1st century AD, upon whose life and teachings Christianity was later constructed,[note 1] but a distinction is made by scholars between 'the Jesus of history' and 'the Christ of faith'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation
