Caedes3 hours ago
Honesty,
The problem is that it is you who is making the claim that jesus was a real person and was resurrected, the burden of proof is on you. I am not making any claim about jesus merely stating that I have seen no evidence to convince me he was real or that he was resurrected.
The problem with your claim about Tacitus is that Tacitus was a meticulous historian and yet he only refers to the title christus not to jesus. His reference is only in relation to giving details of the source of the term Christian. His reference to Pontius Pilate also uses the wrong title for Pontius Pilate he wasn't procurator. The fact that a well respected Roman historian has the correct dates for events pertaining to the Roman empire should be of no surprise. What is a surprise is that he didn't know the name Jesus and didn't know Pontius Pilate's title. Perhaps his source for this small anecdote wasn't very reliable. Either way hardly conclusive evidence for jesus and zero evidence that jesus was resurrected.
I don't have any burden of proof regarding Jesus and i posted information from a Roman historian's point of view.
You can believe Jesus wasn't a real person and therefore wasn't resurrected or not.
No one is going to disfellowship you, figuratively stone you to death or cause you harm in any way no matter what you believe about Jesus unless you are a member of some wacky religious cult.
Your beliefs about Jesus doesn't affect how i should treat you,which is with respect as a fellow human being who is just trying to live your life the best way you see fit like everyone else.
Have a great weekend.