Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jki275 2323 days ago
The quote you claim as a forgery has been a subject of much debate, but I'm relatively certain it's not been proven to be so and many consider it to be at least partially authentic.

Regardless, Jesus was absolutely a historical character. No serious historian debates this.
1 comments
goto11 2322 days ago
The passage outright states that Jesus was the Messiah, which means it is obviously a forgery - Josephus wouldn't have written that since he wasn't a Christian. But the question is how much of the passage that have been altered.
link
jki275 2322 days ago
The discussion has generally been that some people think that statement was added. There’s quite a bit more to it though, and that’s certainly not the only possible - or even obvious - conclusion.
link
goto11 2322 days ago
What do you find the obvious conclusion?
link
jki275 2321 days ago
I don't take an "obvious conclusion" position on it. We simply don't know.

Jesus is a known historical figure. Pretending otherwise is silly. The end.

link