Last month Trump vowed to defend Christianity and urged Christians to vote for him

Last month Trump vowed to defend Christianity and urged Christians to vote for him

“This is really a battle between good and evil,” evangelical TV preacher Hank Kunneman says of the slew of criminal charges facing Donald Trump. “There’s something on President Trump that the enemy fears: It’s called the anointing.”

The Nebraska pastor, who was speaking on cable news show “FlashPoint” last summer, is among several voices in Christian media pressing a message of Biblical proportions: The 2024 presidential race is a fight for America’s soul, and a persecuted Trump has God’s protection.

“They’re just trying to bankrupt him. They’re trying to take everything he’s got. They’re trying to put him in prison,” author, media personality and self-proclaimed prophet Lance Wallnau said in October on “The Jim Bakker Show”, an hour-long daily broadcast that focuses on news and revelations about the end times that it says we are living in.

  • Keith@lemmy.zip
    0·
    8 months ago

    Why would the assumption be that acknowledging the existence of Jesus makes you Christian? And how is not being Christian weakening my claim?

    Non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include the c. first century Jewish historian Josephus and Roman historian Tacitus. These sources are compared to Christian sources, such as the Pauline letters and synoptic gospels, and are usually independent of each other; that is, the Jewish sources do not draw upon the Roman sources. Similarities and differences between these sources are used in the authentication process.[82][83][84][85] From these two independent sources alone, certain facts about Jesus can be adduced: that he existed, his personal name was Jesus, he was called a messiah, he had a brother named James, he won over Jews and gentiles, Jewish leaders had unfavorable opinions of him, Pontius Pilate decided his execution, he was executed by crucifixion, and he was executed during Pilate’s governorship.[33] Josephus and Tacitus agree on four sequential points: a movement was started by Jesus, he was executed by Pontius Pilate, his movement continued after his death, and that a group of “Christians” still existed; analogous to common knowledge of founders and their followers like Plato and Platonists.[86]

    Serious historians of the early Christian movement—all of them—have spent many years preparing to be experts in their field. Just to read the ancient sources requires expertise in a range of ancient languages: Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and often Aramaic, Syriac, and Coptic, not to mention the modern languages of scholarship (for example, German and French). And that is just for starters. Expertise requires years of patiently examining ancient texts and a thorough grounding in the history and culture of Greek and Roman antiquity, the religions of the ancient Mediterranean world, both pagan and Jewish, knowledge of the history of the Christian church and the development of its social life and theology, and, well, lots of other things. It is striking that virtually everyone who has spent all the years needed to attain these qualifications is convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical figure."

    The idea that Jesus was a purely mythical figure has been and still is considered an untenable fringe theory in academic scholarship for more than two centuries,[note 4] but has gained popular attention in recent decades due to the growth of the internet.[8]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      0·
      8 months ago

      Copying and posting gish gallop

      first century Jewish historian Josephus

      Two passages one talking about James which might be a fraud. The other passage mentioning Jesus and we know that one is a a complete fabrication. Also we know that you can’t follow instructions now because Josphius was writing +40 years after the supposed events and I asked for contemporary.

      Roman historian Tacitus.

      Talks about a group called Christus (annoited ones) not Christians (followers of the Annoited one) gets the rank wrong for Pilat indicating that he wasn’t even checking Roman records. Lived almost an entire century after the supposed events.

      such as the Pauline letters a

      Paul reported his visions, admits that he never met the apostles or Jesus before he started preaching, and admits that his.knowledge of Jesus came from dreams not feom humans

      synoptic gospels

      Seriously? John copied off Luke and Matthew, Luke copied off Matthew, Matthew copied off Mark and Mark combined a few random stories from OT with some Roman literature specifically to bash the James community. There is no evidence any of the events in the Gospels occurred and we know the authors were lying about the oral traditions that they were told.

      and are usually independent of each other;

      Bull fucking shit. Mark had access to the letters of Paul and possibly had heard him speak. Additionally Paul was probably dead by the time the Mark Gospel was written. For 4 decades Paul was going around Rome telling stories about his imaginary friend which is amble time for the weird sandwich stories found in Mark. We can trace an exact line between the Gospels and Paul how what he wrote had to be dealt with by later offers. They are independent in the sense that Obama and Biden are independent.

      the Jewish sources do not draw upon the Roman sources.

      Citation needed. Please prove that no Jewish person in history used Roman records for anything.

      From these two independent sources alone, certain facts about Jesus can be adduced: that he existed, his personal name was Jesus, he was called a messiah, he had a brother named James, he won over Jews and gentiles, Jewish leaders had unfavorable opinions of him, Pontius Pilate decided his execution, he was executed by crucifixion, and he was executed during Pilate’s governorship.

      Jesus means saviour. The odds of a saviour being named saviour are about the odds of a revolutionary leader being given the name Rebel at birth. And you haven’t established any of the facts you claim not can you elaborate on any of them.