The Jesus story has details that is most definitely made up i just realized!!!

[EgoDeath]

No first rate scholar doubts the existence of the historical Jesus.

This is a gross oversimplification of the issue. We have some reason to believe that there was possibly a man who was called Jesus during or around the time that the Jesus of the Bible was supposed to have existed.

Historical records weren't exactly so... historical, back then. It can't even compare to today; now we have a multitude of technological means that we can utilize to record historical, and quite mundane, unimportant, events. To call historical records of that time shaky wouldn't be an overstatement. A lot of people back then didn't even know how to read or write. The honest truth is, we can't truly know what happened back then; we can use what evidence (if you want to call it that) we do have and try to form some sort of coherent idea from that evidence.

I think that when asked about these questions, historians love to give concrete, solid answers, mainly because they have a lot of love for history, and probably sort of have their own narrative that they'd like to impart on people. That, and I think people who are watching stuff on the history channel, and the general public, like to hear definitive answers.

I think if we're being totally honest, we can say:

There is some evidence that a man named Jesus may have existed in or around that time.

That's probably the most definitive answer there is. A lot of people don't like to admit that and a lot of people don't like to hear that.

And, to be honest, we could even get into questioning that evidence, and the biases of certain historians (as well as the authenticity of their accounts), like Josephus, which more than a few people have done, but it's really beside the point isn't it?