Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
I'm not sure this question can be answered with complete certainty. Textcritic makes a very good case for saying that the existence of a historical Jesus is highly probable, but it is based on circumstantial evidence, and not so much on contemporary evidence.
I think it should not matter so much if he was real or not. It is the message that is important. The reference, not the symbol.
|
I agree. I was simply rejecting the idea that not a single scholar had recorded evidence or found evidence of his existence.