Jesus Mythicists claims that the evidence we have from the New Testament is not sufficient to demonstrate that Jesus existed. They have a whole list of reasons why they dismiss the New Testament as credible historical evidence.
I’m not going to address those concerns now, although I have elsewhere on this site.
However, my interest in ancient history goes beyond the purpose of responding to the Jesus Myth Theory. I just find it incredibly interesting.
Having studied ancient history for some time, I have come to notice certain things, observations that may be relevant to conversations about the Jesus Myth Theory.
Here are a few:
- Rarely do we have texts from during the lifetime of the individual being described.
- It is not uncommon for our best sources to be centuries after rather than decades after the event.
- Descriptions of supernatural events are often found in the historical texts.
- There is very often differences in detail between the sources describing the same event or individual.
- The historical source may or may not be a religious text.
- A reference to a specific person, even if not a lot of detail is given, is usually accepted as being a historical person unless the text demands a mythical interpretation (e.g. set in the mythical past rather than recent history).
- While historians are critical of the sources, they are usually not overly skeptical.
Now it is possible that Jesus Mythicists are correct and that ancient historians should doubt the historicity of most of the ancient figures known, using the standards demanded by Mythicists. But I doubt it.
