Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians

[robvalue]

So... Jesus is only 99% mythical then. That doesn't exactly make the mythicist possession mental in my opinion. I don't see what difference it makes about that 1% of banal factoids. Why is this such a big deal I wonder? When you have that little information about someone, saying it's "based on" them really doesn't mean much at all. His life story is mythical. (Or in scepto speak, we have no good reason to think his life story is anything other than almost entirely mythical. Angels and shit are a bit of a giveaway.)

The Jesus written about in the bible is not a real person. He is a ridiculous story told about someone who quite possibly existed, or quite possibly more than one person shoved together.