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

[smax]

When there is a lack of evidence to support something, and yet it is widely believed, it is obviously because people want to believe it. In the case of Jesus, we find that people do not necessarily agree about who or what he was, but we find that a large percentage of people take comfort in believing that he existed in one form or another.

For some, he was god himself. For others, he was the son of god. Some see him as great prophet, while others simply think he was a great man who inspired a great movement that impacted cultures around the world.

The belief in Jesus, regardless of it's various forms, is a simple case of emotion outweighing evidence.

Where is his birth certificate?
Where is the record of his public trial?
What did he even look like?
Where is his tomb?

Where is there ANY first hand account of ANYTHING Jesus ever did?

I guess the issue for some people, aside from the emotional desire to believe, is their inability to understand that sometimes, many times in fact, a movement can inspired by lies, deception, greed, envy, or simply the need to control the masses. Any of those things, among others, can father inventions of all kinds.

In the case of Jesus, I suspect his invention was the product of all of the above mentioned things.