One other thing to consider in this discussion:
If there was a mortal Jesus on whom the mythology is based, what do we have left once we remove the supernatural and the miracles?
Some guy named Yeshua (common name) who was a doom-crier (commonplace at that time) who was regarded by a close group of followers as the messiah (go back to Jerusalem at that time and you can probably find a dozen) but never wrote anything down (so who knows what his real teachings were) and never got noticed outside his circle (as evident by the dearth of historical references)?
If this is the standard for the "historical Jesus", there was likely not just one but several.
If there was a mortal Jesus on whom the mythology is based, what do we have left once we remove the supernatural and the miracles?
Some guy named Yeshua (common name) who was a doom-crier (commonplace at that time) who was regarded by a close group of followers as the messiah (go back to Jerusalem at that time and you can probably find a dozen) but never wrote anything down (so who knows what his real teachings were) and never got noticed outside his circle (as evident by the dearth of historical references)?
If this is the standard for the "historical Jesus", there was likely not just one but several.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
