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

[The Grand Nudger]

The claim was not that the ''other side'' is similar to Creationism. It was that the number of serious scholars who take the myth position is framed similarly to the number of scientists who proclaim themselves creationists. When I said the ''debate'' was not serious in scholarly circles, what I said was right. Whether Jesus existed is not a debate in historical circles, but whether an event was significant might generate a debate.

The historical Jesus is a nice, big topic many people could look at and attempt to answer; we have a controversial figure and a controversial religion. Match made in heaven to attract a lot of non-historians who feel more compelled to undermine opposing views.

If however, we were to discuss whether William Gladstone took an interventionist foreign policy during his second and third ministries, this would attract significantly less attention because the subject matter is complex; and suddenly, a historian's opinion is now trustworthy, however that's a debate many historians and scholars may take seriously. That's because you're debating something which can generate a range of view-points; by contrast, the *historical Jesus* ''debate'' is a simplistic, easy question because all an ancient historian needs to verify it is a few sources. That's it.

My point is because you are attached to the subject matter of Christianity/religion, you feel more compelled to laugh at the historical viewpoint of what is considered evidence; but if you were to look at a historical viewpoint in regards to any other topic which does not interest you, then you would simply accept a historian's viewpoint as more valid.

Me saying ''Gladstone did not have an interventionist policy because most historians don't think so'' would be an appeal to authority in an actual historical debate.

Double, triple..hell...quadruple down on your appeals to authority, and your defenses for them.  My response will remain unchanged so long as your replies continue that theme.   "The experts say" -is not capable- of answering the question.."is what the experts say accurate". End of.

We're on to my motives now?...shitlogic
You know how I'd respond to some other, as yet unmentioned claim?... shitlogic

Are we having a conversation about the historical jesus..and the mythicist position....or are you fantasizing about me Messiah? I'll just offer again to discuss the most compelling portion (in your estimation) of the link you posted. We can have that conversation.......or you can continue to do whatever it is you think you're doing.