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

[Brakeman]

A theist could call my neighbor jesus and adjust his bible a little bit and "voila" evidence of a "real" jesus.

The idea of a "son of god" in human form greatly predates the jesus story. It is also likely that the story was a myth that later christians tried to tack on a persona for credence.  Thus the story is still a myth, even with a body.

The actually historical evidence for a jesus as described in the bible is nil. The actual historical evidence for a living person tacked on to the myth is weak and circumstantial despite the desperate, and I do mean desperate, bluster from the theist camp.

Jesus was a myth, get over it..

*Claps*

So convincing; you have now invalidated a historical consensus!

Consensus of people whose careers and funding come from university departments that would be disbanded when consensus that jesus was just a myth is met.

Woo Hoo! The bullshit is deep with this pretend atheist.