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

[Mudhammam]

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.

Everybody basically agrees that Jesus was a Jewish preacher out of Galilee who at some point followed John the Baptist, later acquired a following of his own, was crucified by Pilate during the reign of Tiberius, and then had disciples who started proclaiming that he had risen from the dead in a "spiritual body" to which they cited "appearances" of some form. From these persons spawned the Christian church. Beyond that, there is a lot of disagreement as to what Jesus' central message was, how much of his "biographies" contain any substantial records of historical fact, etc.

Can you answer any of the questions you posed concerning other first century Jewish rabbis? What about famous philosophers and scholars, such as Aristippus of Cyrene, Diogenes of Sinope, Philo of Alexandria, or Pliny the Elder? Can you show us the trial records of Socrates or Gaius Verres? How about the tombs of Plato, Aristotle, or Epicurus? Zeno of Elea or Zeno of Citium? Birth certificates? Do you think unless someone left writings it's more likely that others who attest to their existence are lying? That's a pretty incredible---and ignorant---standard to require.

It sounds to me like you may have some emotional investment in denying the probability that Christian dogmas originally developed from a early first-century crucified preacher, as all of the sources claim. You claim that Jesus was an invented figure to take advantage of “the masses” through “lies, deception, greed, envy, or simply the need to control.”

Evidence?