...it's not evidence for a historical Jesus, because it's not contemporary.

You are being willfully ignorant. Historians say there's a historical Jesus. Their standard does not require contemporary evidence. They, as a professional and academic body set their standards. Enough said.

No, they're not. Historical practice is well and good, but historians can and do disagree.

Yes they can disagree, but few disagree about this issue.

There is NOT the consensus you describe on the issue in the historical community, as TVoLT pointed out to you. Sure, contemporary evidence could have been destroyed, but what we know now is that there is no contemporary evidence... and there IS a giant similarity between the Jesus story and the previous man/god messiah myths. Given that, I think it's more likely that the Jesus story descended/evolved from those myths than that there happened to be a man, undocumented during his time (or documented, but that documentation later destroyed) who just so happened to fit huge chunks of those previous myths.

It's not so simple as claiming mytholological descent. Read up on this subject and you'll see what I mean.

I never mentioned a Christian conspiracy, much less on your part.

Nor did I say so, but you do seem to get worked up about religious historical matters when non-religious ones are just as valid to discuss. It looks like you have a chip on your shoulder.


You're the one who's looking narrow-minded and ignorant because you're tossing insults left and right and being generally abusive.

Oh, apparently you are the only one allowed to dish out. I've seen you go off on folks many a time. Now you are so acutely sensitive? How rich. Your opinon is unfounded and I told you so. I am not being narrow minded. I'm arguing for you to actually take the time to read on this subject so you'll be in a better position to judge for yourself. That's not narrow minded--that's open minded.

Until you do actually read up on a subject like this and know what you're talking about you only have your wits, rationality, and irrationality to rely on. Historians have so much more to offer on a subject like this and you are ignoring it. I'm asking you not to.


Heterodox but Orthoprax

As fast on the draw...
...as he is in the drawing room!