this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2025
63 points (69.6% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

8130 readers
204 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I think Lemmy has a problem with history in general, since most people on here have degrees/training in STEM. I see a lot of inaccurate “pop history” shared on here, and a lack of understanding of historiography/how historians analyze primary sources.

The rejection of Jesus’s historicity seems to be accepting C S Lewis’s argument - that if he existed, he was a “lunatic, liar, or lord,” instead of realizing that there was nothing unusual about a messianic Jewish troublemaker in Judea during the early Roman Empire.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world -4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I never understood the problem with Jesus existing. Like, duh, you think the Roman Empire, the America of the time, the Big Satan, would just be randomly coerced into changing their state religion by, well, nothing? A group of loud folks that followed the (new and radical at their time, btw) teachings of... no one? Even without much historical knowledge, Jesus existing seems like the most reasonable conclusion, lol.

I think those who had bad experiences with religion often go all out... but just because some religious ideologies might be internally inconsistent or just because your parents forced you to go to church instead of letting you play Pokémon Emerald and you resent them for it does not mean that nothing behind Judeo-Christianity happened. 🤷

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Just because Jesus could have existed, doesn't necessarily mean that he did

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

Except a guy called (roughly translated and modernized) Jesus did exist and was associated with messianic cults and seems to have been crucified. Which wasn't particularly uncommon, either the name, the messianic cults, or the crucifixions. Basically there's no reason not to accept a guy that seems to be who Christianity is based on actually existed and probably said and did some of the (non miraculous, obviously) things that were written about him.

[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean, he did leave a big mark in the world but yeah, sure, although we're about two millennia late for visual confirmation, lol.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think you misunderstand this post: Jesus is a dude who lived. Just a dude. No one is making any more claims.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 days ago

And that's not an agreed upon fact among historians.