Embed Notice

@Threadbane @DaWoDerPfeffer @Robert_R_Freitag_II @JoeQuinlan @lednabwm I think what this tells you is that "was there a historical Jesus" is defined in two contradictory ways that are played against each other in bad faith by theists.

Like, if the question is "are historical claims made by the bible, about Jesus, true" the responsible answer fits somewhere between "obviously not" and "there is no evidence".

But if the question is "was Christianity founded around a cult leader claiming to be the messiah, who would later come to be known as "Jesus Christ", that seems fairly likely.

The trick is that people point to pretty good evidence for the second question, and claim that as historical proof for the first question.