(December 3, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Cherub786 Wrote:(December 3, 2018 at 1:02 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: What's the point? If Jesus the miracle man didn't exist, but Jesus the apocalyptic preacher did, why would we care? Nobody gives a shit about the historical Jesus. He's just a prop used to shore up crappy arguments about miracle Jesus. If Jesus was just a man, I'm happy to embrace that possibility. But that's not what I'm actually being asked to embrace. The historical Jesus argument is just a moronic bait and switch.
You don't have to care. The debate is about the historical existence of a figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth. Since the mythicists have denied this on a very weak foundation, I am citing actual qualified and accredited historians and scholars in the field who have debated and refuted those mythicists like Robert Price.
I care because the historical Jesus is being used as a stalking horse for claims about the miracle man by the same people who are supporting the existence of an actual historical Jesus, and who have a vested interest in promoting the historical Jesus for that very reason. That conflict of interest pretty thoroughly undermines the credibility of those "scholars." What were you saying about a weak case?