On "Scholarly Consensus"

[Beta Ray Bill]

It's not a matter of liking. It's a matter of what we can know.

So what do you think would constitute an authentic source for actually knowing that Jesus existed?

Any record earlier than 48 CE, which we do not have

What about the earliest followers, the earliest writers, and the closest disciples who all testified to his existence? They were just lying about it?

We don't know what the earliest followers believed, because, again, we have nothing before 48 CE, almost 20 years after Jesus died. If you study the Epistles of Paul, not once does he say he learned anything from the apostles or early Christians. He always says his info is from scripture (which we do not have anymore) and revelation (which can not be verified). What did the apostles teach him? Who knows?

If your answer is yes to the last question, then the next question is, do you really know that they lied?

I don't know if they were lying, but the story of Jesus greatly changes over time. What Paul wrote about has little in common with what the Gospel of John says, for example.

I don't think it's a matter of knowing, but a matter of which is more likely.

If you analyze the historicity of the Christian faith, you will see its stories become less and less the "likely" truth. Jesus was of no concern to the Jews or the Romans while he was alive, he only grew in importance with the spread of Christianity to the pagans, and the adaptation of Pagan myths (such as the virgin birth and rising on the 3rd day) and fantasy into the story of his life.