Any Evidence For A Historical Jesus?

[DeistPaladin]

Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

Argument from Silence isn't a logical fallacy in the event that we should reasonably expect to find evidence.

If a miracle working godman really did walk the earth bringing back the dead, healing the sick, casting out demons, etc. it is perfectly reasonable to expect that someone would have taken notice.

If Jesus' ministry was as controversial as alleged, that the priestly establishment broke every rule to get rid of him, if his fame did spread far and wide to the surrounding provinces and people from all around flocked to to see him, if even the nobles like Herod Antipas took notice and asked if he was John the Baptist reborn, it would be reasonable to expect we might know as much about him from contemporary non-Christian sources as we know of far less significant messiah wannabes.

If Jesus really did rise from the dead and was seen by so many, the Romans would have taken notice of such a story. A condemned criminal that was crucified was made an example of for the masses. If such a man were to ever be seen having survived the ordeal, it would be an embarrassment to the Romans. It is reasonable to think someone would have taken notice, especially to speak ill of predecessors or of Pilate.

If Jesus didn't perform miracles, rise from the dead and had no successful ministry in his lifetime, he wasn't really Jesus, now was he?

---

P.S. I'll accept the debate if Min is too exhausted of the old run-around.

---

P.P.S. One stipulation: I'll be using the Bible as my source. If you wish to argue that the "historical Jesus" was nothing like the Biblical character, as far as I'm concerned it isn't Jesus.