| Avinash_Tyagi said: Not really as it was written between 90 and 100 AD at the earliest, meaning that a John who knew Christ in 30 AD would have been in his late 70's or 80's if it was him, very unlikely. Also we aren't arguing about Nero or others whose existence is dubious, perhpas the stories of them are wrong as well, who knows, but here wae are discussing the fact that Christ's existence is uncertain |
You are correct, John did live in his 70's or 80's. According to most scholars, he has been cited to of lived over 90 years. Well outside of normal lifespans of that age, but still possible, especially given the fact that Christian writers such as Polycarp, Papias, and Quadratus mentioned that there were still a few living people that had firsthand accounts of Jesus' life as late as 90-100CE. Very old, yes, impossible, no, given the sheer number of people that were supposedly witness (as citing the Bible) to the ministry of Jesus.
And I understand your scepticism of Jesus' existance. But I look at it this way:
In order to believe that Jesus did not exist, you must believe that 100% of all accounts given about him are false. But in order to believe that Jesus did exist, you must believe that 1% are true. To me, those are pretty reasonable odds to believe that he existed.
Now, like Rocketpig and others - the question is to believe if Christianity paints an accurate portrayl of Jesus the Christ, which is a totally different argument altogether.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
