The fact that the stories around Jesus are so different from each other and contradicting to high degrees, trying to please different groups (virgin birth for pagans, Josef being from david's lineage for jews), makes me think that people so desparately wanted his existence to be important and have meaning. Therefore, I do think that Jesus existed, because if not, they would have fabricated him out of thin air, without contradictions.
him out of thin air and make sure that the story sticks.
Jesus was a Jewish rabbi that found a big audience in the poor, oppressed Jews under the Roman occupation.
When he became a real problem, the Romans killed him. Those who took over his cult reinvented him, fabricating details to paint him as the messiah. The Greeks added in their mythology as well, borrowing 'Hades' - soon to be known as 'Hell'.
And there is good reason to believe that as a RESULT of that debate, many details of this founder's life were fabricated in order to make him 'fit' as the messiah.
For instance, the nativity. It is historically wrong. In all likelihood he was born in Nazareth, not Bethlehem... but then he couldn't be the messiah.
Check this out, somebody started Christianity. It just didnt spring up out of know where and people just started believing in a man named Jesus. The very religion is named after its founder. So somebody started Christianity, and the gospels and these ancient historians all say this crucified guy started it.Simple right? And back then nobody, even the people that thought Christianity was superstitious none sense,thought he didnt exist. The debate back the was his divinity.Not his existence.
After all the dust settles, we have only two choices. Either the universe brought itself into existence, or something outside the universe, an external cause brought it into existence. The problem is how something could brought itself into existence? Isn't possible, therefore the cause must be external. The only thing present was energy. The God of the Bible is described with the same attributes of energy before energy was described. The existence of God is the best explanation. Open your eyes
@katrinalisa2002 I agree. the attempts by christian apologists to link jesus to dependable historic documents is really embarrassing. unfotunately believers run with whatever their told because it's what they WANT to believe. to them the truth is unimportant. it's pathetic but i'm afraid that's the world we live in.
Luke (23:44) tells us that during the crucifixion, “It was about the sixth hour and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.” Yet no contemporary writer considered the daytime shrouding of the planet in blackness worth even a passing reference – not even Pliny the Elder or Seneca even though they lived in the right period and they wrote about much lesser events such as eclipses.
@h2omanz your ignorance of theological study is mind boggling. nobody knows who wrote the gopels but they were certainly written well after the supposed death of jesus. pilate NEVER mentions him. that comes from a novel written in 1928 where the auther is imagining what pilate might have written. it's a common mistake among idiots. dionysius born in 470ad. phlegon born around 80ad. thallus born around 50ad. you might be impressed by hearsay written well after the events, i am not,
1.I'd have to return the unschooled theological comment ball back in ur court. Gospels that were written after Jesus death: Oddly falling within 30-40yrs of His death, by historian standards is 'xtremely exceptional' when most ancient writings average 1000yrs after an event. Books from His brothers date close to the same-all contemporaries. Pontius..1928 novel..what?lol really? I am talking about the letter he wrote to Tiberius Caesar from the epistles of Pilot/Apocrypha
2.Dionysus Esiguus?I am talking about Dionysius the Areopagite letters to Polycarp. Thallos WROTE about it in 50, not born then. Phlegon, true not a contemporary but was schooled by them. He was a non believer that recorded the eclipse during crux He records an eclipse with the moon opposite the sun? Wow almost like it was a miracle or something. I won't drop to your level and call you the idiot. Mind boggling/among idiots-lol-priceless.
@h2omanz please be more clear about who you are refering to, it will save me time and effort. as for dionysius the areopagite, i checked him out in the catholic encyclopedia. they regard him as living at the latter half of the 5th century at the very earliest. please tell me you can do better than this? your standards of evidence are shockingly low. everything i've seen so far suggests legend rather than fact. u need to be honest with yourself and accept that.
@lordscully 1.Cat encyclopedia? Even 'Atheistic' WikiP lists the facts on the Historian letters. Well of course you have to deny/accuse such as forgeries, at all cost no matter how ridiculous. If something is considered reliable it quite possibly might be true, cant have that. Jesus did miracles right in front of people and they didnt believe, so I am not expecting any differ from u . Christian websites? Funny as I actually study antiquities and have many of the letters in books. You
2,condemn me of not checking things out and believing what suits me. LOL, 20+yrs vs you're 2 minute Google search. This is the extent of your counter evidence.WOW. When one does get his education from Google it is easily exposed, as your errors from your first reply paints the picture. Playing the 'hypocrite' as 2mins was all u needed to find what 'suits' you. Well backed evidence.lol. Do you believe in the Lockness monster? Google has results that state it exists, so yeap my 2 mins of
3.research 'prove' it true w/o investigating further. Pls b more clear about my references?Why so it will narrow down your Google search? Oh my, Dionysius was a contemporary Judge in the book of Acts, not a 5th century Google search result. My standard of evidence is not low, as you hoped, as you havent a clue of the qualifications n what is acceptable by honest historians. As far a legends(again outta ur league again) it takes many years for a legend to b created, not a couple of
4.decades-FACT. Thats another epic failed attempt to deny evidences. You can keep acting like you know what you are talking about, but you only expose your preconceived n unschooled bias/denial as we go.
@h2omanz i have no problem with the truth, no matter what it might be. it really doesn't matter to me if the story is based on a real character. it matters hugely to you though, seeing as your faith requires his existence. you seem to be suggesting that there is no debate among historians about whether or not he existed, that only ignorant googling idiots feel it is unproved. please tell me if that is what you are saying. if you know of a source you feel i can trust then what is it?
@h2omanz If you must know i happen to think that it is more likely that the gospels are based on a real person. my argument here is that it cannot be considered proven. there just isn't enough data to make a firm conclusion. you seem to be suggesting that there is no doubt about it and no debate to be had, that the question is settled. unambiguous reference to jesus is hard to find (outside of the bible). there's a big difference between that and some vague reference to a christ.
1.Am I talkn to a differ person, wheres the insults, have a change of heart? Actually it does matter to you. Very much so, in order to deny God, Jesus can't be who He stated He was and one better never existed. there is plenty of debate between historians, yet honest (many atheistic as well) do admit that the evidence is over and beyond the guidelines of acceptable history. I don't think the evidence is shut case without investigation, but as
2.for ancient manuscripts its exceptional for that era. There are references of Jesus outside the Bible, most later but this is due to His short 3yr span, He was in the furthest remote corner of the Empire, as well historians rarely wrote anything about religious figures.
@h2omanz the first century is not some historical black hole. there were plenty of historians in the right place at the right time to have mentioned such an incredible character as jesus. according to the bible he was stirring up a huge shit storm, religiously and politically. seneca the younger (4bc-65ad) wrote a book called "on superstition" in which he lambasted all the major religions of his time but had nothing to say about jesus or christianity.
@h2omanz his brother Gallio, whom according to the bible, was at the trial of paul. he has nothing to say about jesus or, strangely, paul either. justice of tiberius, a native of galilee not far from jesus hometown, wrote a huge history covering the entire time jesus is said to have lived. in fact the only reason we know about him is because of what he said about jesus. NOTHING! Philo of alexandria who was alive before, during and after the time of christ, clearly knows nothing about it
@h2omanz there is a deafening silence from people who should have been very aware of jesus and his miracles, his political aggitation, his multitude of followers. you can't read the bible and claim that jesus was some backwater unknown prophet. if the bible is to be believed then there really should be plenty of contemporary accounts. there is nothing. i find this highly unusual. there are other sects of the time which were considered worth mentioning but not jesus? strange.
@h2omanz to say that in for me to be atheist requires that jesus never existed is ridiculous. his divinity, miracles and resurrection are a whole different ball game. one does not prove the other. the gospels are not reliable as they full of contradictions, both within themselves and from one another. also we have no idea who wrote them. as you should be well aware they were later attributed to matthew mark luke and john arbitrarily by the church.
@h2omanz pilates letter to tiberius i considered to be a 4th century forgery even by catholic historians. seems to me you only read about thee things on fundamentalist christian websites and take them a fact without checking them out for yourserlf. it took me 2 mins to find out it's a forgery. you just believe whatever it suits you to believe. nothing you have given me could be regarded as reliable by anyone other than those with a bias. and before u say it, i don't care if he existed.
@w0359529 as usual you christians just hate fact checking. the references you mention by tacitus and josephus are considered by historians to be fraudulent, added later by christians. josephus was born in 37ad, tacitus in 55ad. they were not alive at the time jesus is alleged to have been. give me a referance to any mention of jesus by anyone who lived at the same time (which isn't considered by experts to be fraudulent) and then we can talk. just one will do......i'm waiting.
@lordscully even if they were not fradulent additions they are such vague references, to a phenonemon that was quite common (i.e a wandering prophet with a couple of hundred followers) that they can't really be taken as genuine I.D's of Jesus.
The Gospels were written when the majority of eye witnesses to Jesus were still alive. If the Gospels added all kinds of miracles and fancy things that the original Jesus didn't do, the eye witnesses would have easily easily refuted the claims of the Gospels. The synoptic Gospels date from around 50-70AD, scholars agree that this time is much too close to the life of Jesus for serious changes or miraculous claims to be falsely attributed to Jesus. The miracles were NOT added on at a later date.
@w0359529 The Gospels present Jesus as someone from the despised place of Galilee who was rejected by his own people, he associated with sinners etc. , was accused of blasphemy, and was put to death by the disgraceful punishment of crucifixion after being deserted by his followers. These attributes aren't the kinds of characteristics overly zealous followers of a sage/ teacher would attribute to their sage in first century Palestine.
No eye witnesses? John was an eye witness, Matthew was an eye witness, and Mark copied Peter's testimony who was an eye witness. Just because they were written 20-25 years after Jesus died isn't a reason to doubt their accuracy. Many events in ancient Rome and Greece were historically recorded many many generations or centuries after they took place. For instance, the first biography of Alexander the Great was written 400 years after he died by Plutarch
@w0359529 Also there are several parts in the Gospels that are found in secular sources like Tacitus and Josephus. Disregarding something because it has miracles and supernatural things begs the question. They have not yet proved that miracles are impossible so to disregard the gospels because they have supernatural occurrences assumes what they have not yet proved.
Evidence of Jesus? I suppose you would be looking for a chicken bone that he left at the last supper. How can two people be this educated and yet be so stupid. What instance of evidence would you require for you to believe in God. I'm telling you right now that I already know that no matter what evidence anyone presents to you, you are a hopeless cause. Unless God says otherwise.
@chica0616 you still base your said opinions upon a book which has no credible evidence about anything, who wrote it, who copied what, and it is hearsay. Facts do not require belief. And whereas beliefs can live comfortably without evidence at all, facts depend on evidence.
Paul wrote of his meetings with Jesus' disciples, who were contemporary eyewitnesses. Whether or not Paul was lying or he wasn't the author is another matter.
That's a pretty honest caller. When you catch him, he concedes. Too many Christian callers start making up B.S. to keep the exchanges going until they can back Matt into a corner, which almost never happens. xD
The fact that the stories around Jesus are so different from each other and contradicting to high degrees, trying to please different groups (virgin birth for pagans, Josef being from david's lineage for jews), makes me think that people so desparately wanted his existence to be important and have meaning. Therefore, I do think that Jesus existed, because if not, they would have fabricated him out of thin air, without contradictions.
him out of thin air and make sure that the story sticks.
TheFoemp 2 days ago
@dejesusluisx
Those are not the only two options.
The cosmos may have always existed - just as you seem to think God always existed.
In fact, this is the simplest - and thus the most likely - explanation.
taicleis 2 months ago
Jesus was a Jewish rabbi that found a big audience in the poor, oppressed Jews under the Roman occupation.
When he became a real problem, the Romans killed him. Those who took over his cult reinvented him, fabricating details to paint him as the messiah. The Greeks added in their mythology as well, borrowing 'Hades' - soon to be known as 'Hell'.
taicleis 2 months ago
@ScholarVisual
Yes indeed; that WAS the debate.
And there is good reason to believe that as a RESULT of that debate, many details of this founder's life were fabricated in order to make him 'fit' as the messiah.
For instance, the nativity. It is historically wrong. In all likelihood he was born in Nazareth, not Bethlehem... but then he couldn't be the messiah.
taicleis 2 months ago
Check this out, somebody started Christianity. It just didnt spring up out of know where and people just started believing in a man named Jesus. The very religion is named after its founder. So somebody started Christianity, and the gospels and these ancient historians all say this crucified guy started it.Simple right? And back then nobody, even the people that thought Christianity was superstitious none sense,thought he didnt exist. The debate back the was his divinity.Not his existence.
ScholarVisual 2 months ago
What liars
zachp95 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
After all the dust settles, we have only two choices. Either the universe brought itself into existence, or something outside the universe, an external cause brought it into existence. The problem is how something could brought itself into existence? Isn't possible, therefore the cause must be external. The only thing present was energy. The God of the Bible is described with the same attributes of energy before energy was described. The existence of God is the best explanation. Open your eyes
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
I danced on the Sabbath and I cured the lame
The holy people said it was a shame
They ripped, they stripped, they hung me high
Left me there on the cross to die
I danced on a Friday when the world turned black
It's hard to dance with the devil on your back
They buried my body, they thought I was gone
But I am the dance, and the dance goes on
Learn to dance
ladyofnewroses 4 months ago
@katrinalisa2002 I agree. the attempts by christian apologists to link jesus to dependable historic documents is really embarrassing. unfotunately believers run with whatever their told because it's what they WANT to believe. to them the truth is unimportant. it's pathetic but i'm afraid that's the world we live in.
lordscully 5 months ago
Luke (23:44) tells us that during the crucifixion, “It was about the sixth hour and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.” Yet no contemporary writer considered the daytime shrouding of the planet in blackness worth even a passing reference – not even Pliny the Elder or Seneca even though they lived in the right period and they wrote about much lesser events such as eclipses.
lordscully 5 months ago
@lordscully
Contemporaries: 4 Gospel writers+Peter/Bartho., Pilate, Dionysius, Phlegon, Thallus all wrote about the darkness as well as the great quake.
h2omanz 1 month ago
@h2omanz your ignorance of theological study is mind boggling. nobody knows who wrote the gopels but they were certainly written well after the supposed death of jesus. pilate NEVER mentions him. that comes from a novel written in 1928 where the auther is imagining what pilate might have written. it's a common mistake among idiots. dionysius born in 470ad. phlegon born around 80ad. thallus born around 50ad. you might be impressed by hearsay written well after the events, i am not,
lordscully 1 month ago
@lordscully
1.I'd have to return the unschooled theological comment ball back in ur court. Gospels that were written after Jesus death: Oddly falling within 30-40yrs of His death, by historian standards is 'xtremely exceptional' when most ancient writings average 1000yrs after an event. Books from His brothers date close to the same-all contemporaries. Pontius..1928 novel..what?lol really? I am talking about the letter he wrote to Tiberius Caesar from the epistles of Pilot/Apocrypha
h2omanz 1 month ago
2.Dionysus Esiguus?I am talking about Dionysius the Areopagite letters to Polycarp. Thallos WROTE about it in 50, not born then. Phlegon, true not a contemporary but was schooled by them. He was a non believer that recorded the eclipse during crux He records an eclipse with the moon opposite the sun? Wow almost like it was a miracle or something. I won't drop to your level and call you the idiot. Mind boggling/among idiots-lol-priceless.
h2omanz 1 month ago
@h2omanz please be more clear about who you are refering to, it will save me time and effort. as for dionysius the areopagite, i checked him out in the catholic encyclopedia. they regard him as living at the latter half of the 5th century at the very earliest. please tell me you can do better than this? your standards of evidence are shockingly low. everything i've seen so far suggests legend rather than fact. u need to be honest with yourself and accept that.
lordscully 1 month ago
@lordscully 1.Cat encyclopedia? Even 'Atheistic' WikiP lists the facts on the Historian letters. Well of course you have to deny/accuse such as forgeries, at all cost no matter how ridiculous. If something is considered reliable it quite possibly might be true, cant have that. Jesus did miracles right in front of people and they didnt believe, so I am not expecting any differ from u . Christian websites? Funny as I actually study antiquities and have many of the letters in books. You
h2omanz 1 month ago
2,condemn me of not checking things out and believing what suits me. LOL, 20+yrs vs you're 2 minute Google search. This is the extent of your counter evidence.WOW. When one does get his education from Google it is easily exposed, as your errors from your first reply paints the picture. Playing the 'hypocrite' as 2mins was all u needed to find what 'suits' you. Well backed evidence.lol. Do you believe in the Lockness monster? Google has results that state it exists, so yeap my 2 mins of
h2omanz 1 month ago
3.research 'prove' it true w/o investigating further. Pls b more clear about my references?Why so it will narrow down your Google search? Oh my, Dionysius was a contemporary Judge in the book of Acts, not a 5th century Google search result. My standard of evidence is not low, as you hoped, as you havent a clue of the qualifications n what is acceptable by honest historians. As far a legends(again outta ur league again) it takes many years for a legend to b created, not a couple of
h2omanz 1 month ago
4.decades-FACT. Thats another epic failed attempt to deny evidences. You can keep acting like you know what you are talking about, but you only expose your preconceived n unschooled bias/denial as we go.
h2omanz 1 month ago
@h2omanz i have no problem with the truth, no matter what it might be. it really doesn't matter to me if the story is based on a real character. it matters hugely to you though, seeing as your faith requires his existence. you seem to be suggesting that there is no debate among historians about whether or not he existed, that only ignorant googling idiots feel it is unproved. please tell me if that is what you are saying. if you know of a source you feel i can trust then what is it?
lordscully 1 month ago
@h2omanz If you must know i happen to think that it is more likely that the gospels are based on a real person. my argument here is that it cannot be considered proven. there just isn't enough data to make a firm conclusion. you seem to be suggesting that there is no doubt about it and no debate to be had, that the question is settled. unambiguous reference to jesus is hard to find (outside of the bible). there's a big difference between that and some vague reference to a christ.
lordscully 1 month ago
@lordscully
1.Am I talkn to a differ person, wheres the insults, have a change of heart? Actually it does matter to you. Very much so, in order to deny God, Jesus can't be who He stated He was and one better never existed. there is plenty of debate between historians, yet honest (many atheistic as well) do admit that the evidence is over and beyond the guidelines of acceptable history. I don't think the evidence is shut case without investigation, but as
h2omanz 1 month ago
2.for ancient manuscripts its exceptional for that era. There are references of Jesus outside the Bible, most later but this is due to His short 3yr span, He was in the furthest remote corner of the Empire, as well historians rarely wrote anything about religious figures.
h2omanz 1 month ago
@h2omanz the first century is not some historical black hole. there were plenty of historians in the right place at the right time to have mentioned such an incredible character as jesus. according to the bible he was stirring up a huge shit storm, religiously and politically. seneca the younger (4bc-65ad) wrote a book called "on superstition" in which he lambasted all the major religions of his time but had nothing to say about jesus or christianity.
lordscully 1 month ago
@h2omanz his brother Gallio, whom according to the bible, was at the trial of paul. he has nothing to say about jesus or, strangely, paul either. justice of tiberius, a native of galilee not far from jesus hometown, wrote a huge history covering the entire time jesus is said to have lived. in fact the only reason we know about him is because of what he said about jesus. NOTHING! Philo of alexandria who was alive before, during and after the time of christ, clearly knows nothing about it
lordscully 1 month ago
@h2omanz there is a deafening silence from people who should have been very aware of jesus and his miracles, his political aggitation, his multitude of followers. you can't read the bible and claim that jesus was some backwater unknown prophet. if the bible is to be believed then there really should be plenty of contemporary accounts. there is nothing. i find this highly unusual. there are other sects of the time which were considered worth mentioning but not jesus? strange.
lordscully 1 month ago
@h2omanz to say that in for me to be atheist requires that jesus never existed is ridiculous. his divinity, miracles and resurrection are a whole different ball game. one does not prove the other. the gospels are not reliable as they full of contradictions, both within themselves and from one another. also we have no idea who wrote them. as you should be well aware they were later attributed to matthew mark luke and john arbitrarily by the church.
lordscully 1 month ago
@h2omanz pilates letter to tiberius i considered to be a 4th century forgery even by catholic historians. seems to me you only read about thee things on fundamentalist christian websites and take them a fact without checking them out for yourserlf. it took me 2 mins to find out it's a forgery. you just believe whatever it suits you to believe. nothing you have given me could be regarded as reliable by anyone other than those with a bias. and before u say it, i don't care if he existed.
lordscully 1 month ago
@w0359529 as usual you christians just hate fact checking. the references you mention by tacitus and josephus are considered by historians to be fraudulent, added later by christians. josephus was born in 37ad, tacitus in 55ad. they were not alive at the time jesus is alleged to have been. give me a referance to any mention of jesus by anyone who lived at the same time (which isn't considered by experts to be fraudulent) and then we can talk. just one will do......i'm waiting.
lordscully 5 months ago
@lordscully even if they were not fradulent additions they are such vague references, to a phenonemon that was quite common (i.e a wandering prophet with a couple of hundred followers) that they can't really be taken as genuine I.D's of Jesus.
katrinalisa2002 5 months ago
Censorship exists at Atheist Experience
j919or 5 months ago
Yes Jesus was God manifest in the flesh
1. The gospels are awesome historical documentation of that time
2. Jesus accepted worship and the religious leaders tried to stone Jesus for claiming to be God
3. Jesus claimed that He would live inside of each believer.
4. Jesus claimed to exist before his bodily life.
5. Thomas called Him God and wasnt corrected
j919or 5 months ago
@j919or In the same way that Dracula is historical documentation of its time.
katrinalisa2002 5 months ago
Suetonius is such a gossip. Lol.
APocketOfTime 8 months ago
The Gospels were written when the majority of eye witnesses to Jesus were still alive. If the Gospels added all kinds of miracles and fancy things that the original Jesus didn't do, the eye witnesses would have easily easily refuted the claims of the Gospels. The synoptic Gospels date from around 50-70AD, scholars agree that this time is much too close to the life of Jesus for serious changes or miraculous claims to be falsely attributed to Jesus. The miracles were NOT added on at a later date.
w0359529 11 months ago
@w0359529 The Gospels present Jesus as someone from the despised place of Galilee who was rejected by his own people, he associated with sinners etc. , was accused of blasphemy, and was put to death by the disgraceful punishment of crucifixion after being deserted by his followers. These attributes aren't the kinds of characteristics overly zealous followers of a sage/ teacher would attribute to their sage in first century Palestine.
w0359529 11 months ago
No eye witnesses? John was an eye witness, Matthew was an eye witness, and Mark copied Peter's testimony who was an eye witness. Just because they were written 20-25 years after Jesus died isn't a reason to doubt their accuracy. Many events in ancient Rome and Greece were historically recorded many many generations or centuries after they took place. For instance, the first biography of Alexander the Great was written 400 years after he died by Plutarch
w0359529 11 months ago
@w0359529 Also there are several parts in the Gospels that are found in secular sources like Tacitus and Josephus. Disregarding something because it has miracles and supernatural things begs the question. They have not yet proved that miracles are impossible so to disregard the gospels because they have supernatural occurrences assumes what they have not yet proved.
w0359529 11 months ago
@w0359529 how did illiterate fisherman and shepherds write the gospels? in Greek, no less, the language of educated people of the time?
katrinalisa2002 5 months ago
short clip:
watch?v=AxqWpIv-uRE
dtadeo2006 1 year ago
One of the better videos I think where neither side is getting all hyped up.
bander87 1 year ago
No serious scholar believes that Jesus did NOT exist.
watch?v=OYn5Pl478Ww And many others.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid
watch?v=wZ2DELn2fFA
RetSquid 1 year ago
Evidence of Jesus? I suppose you would be looking for a chicken bone that he left at the last supper. How can two people be this educated and yet be so stupid. What instance of evidence would you require for you to believe in God. I'm telling you right now that I already know that no matter what evidence anyone presents to you, you are a hopeless cause. Unless God says otherwise.
chica0616 1 year ago
@chica0616
You allude to evidence without actually presenting anything specific.
vrazwer 1 year ago
@chica0616 you still base your said opinions upon a book which has no credible evidence about anything, who wrote it, who copied what, and it is hearsay. Facts do not require belief. And whereas beliefs can live comfortably without evidence at all, facts depend on evidence.
BrianPurge 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Paul wrote of his meetings with Jesus' disciples, who were contemporary eyewitnesses. Whether or not Paul was lying or he wasn't the author is another matter.
resedoton 1 year ago
Comment removed
resedoton 1 year ago
That's a pretty honest caller. When you catch him, he concedes. Too many Christian callers start making up B.S. to keep the exchanges going until they can back Matt into a corner, which almost never happens. xD
Tanoro 1 year ago
@Tanoro
What do you mean almost? It never happens
Wordlaw12 1 year ago