corythatwas Wed 07-Feb-18 08:16:19

While there is clearly a lot, a lot, a lot more evidence for Julius Caesar as a historical person than for Jesus, that is because Julius Caesar was an exceptionally bad choice for a comparison. There is about as much as evidence for Jesus as for most people who make it into books on Roman history in the centuries before and after Caesar: the consuls and senators and barbarian chieftains that are mentioned once or twice in a not-exactly-contemporary source and that nobody has any problems with regarding as historical because there is very little at stake.



But obviously, accepting Jesus as a historical person does not lead to proof of his godhead. I do believe that Jesus was the son of God, while I do not believe that Caligula was a manifestation of the goddess Venus. But I am very aware that there is no proof I can advance: this is purely a matter of faith, and if people want to say I am bonkers, there isn't much I can do to stop them. I have to accept that that comes with the territory.



What I will not accept is other people telling me that I must be a homophobe or a creationist or something else that they have decided is part of my faith because of some totally different group of Christians who have partly different beliefs. Bonkers, yes- not a problem. Dinosaur denier- certainly not! And like many other Christians, I do not believe that gay people burn in hell for their sexuality either. If I make it to the other side and find out I was wrong, I shall have to renounce my faith.