Twitter | Search | |
Tom Holland
Oh Christ, not this batshit crazy theory again! Arguing that Jesus or Muhammad didn't exist is the atheist equivalent of creationism. It's putting the cart of what you want to believe for ideological reasons ahead of the horse of overwhelming evidence.
Reply Retweet Like More
Tom Holland 26 Nov 18
Replying to @TimONeill007
Having neither the time nor the patience to elaborate on the manifold evidence for Jesus having existed, I will point those interested in reading more to the estimable :
Reply Retweet Like
Tom Holland 27 Nov 18
Replying to @3ysmike
Yes, by the standards of evidence for lower-class provincials in the Roman Empire, it’s overwhelming.
Reply Retweet Like
Tom Holland 26 Nov 18
How do you know it was not an invocation?
Reply Retweet Like
Amy Mantravadi 26 Nov 18
Replying to @holland_tom
There is more evidence for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth than many historical figures we take for granted. I’m not sure why anyone should fear his existence as a human being. That he was divine: that’s where it gets controversial.
Reply Retweet Like
Tom Holland 26 Nov 18
Replying to @AmyMantravadi
Because atheism is, in its essential, a religious denomination.
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Heather Williams 26 Nov 18
Replying to @holland_tom
That Jesus, as a historical figure, really existed isn't really up for debate. That he was who he said he was is certainly up for debate.
Reply Retweet Like
Tom Holland 26 Nov 18
Replying to @alrightPET
More than that, what he said he was is up for debate.
Reply Retweet Like
Cameron Reilly 26 Nov 18
Replying to @holland_tom
I'd hardly say the evidence is "overwhelming". It's marginal, at the very best.
Reply Retweet Like
Abi Mobbs 26 Nov 18
as 'marginal' as the evidence for many other figures in the first century, not equivalent to what ought to make us doubt their existence! this really isn't controversial in the field of new testament history.
Reply Retweet Like