Why do most non-Christians not question the historicity of Jesus the man?

Question

I asked a question earlier today regarding why historians tend to agree on the existence of a historical Jesus, and received several answers suggesting I'm a crazed fundamentalist lunatic for even considering the possibility that a story that sounds like a work of fiction derived from OT exegesis, might actually be a work of fiction derived from OT exegesis.

The evidence of a historical Jesus is simply not overwhelming, and a lot of puzzles are greatly simplified without such an assumption, so why is it not valid to question it?

Answer 1

Question away. I think he most likely didn't exist. At best he was probably an amalgamation of self-proclaimed prophets.

Answer 2

I've been posting links to information that indicates that there is no historical evidence that Jesus ever existed. Considering that the links I post are only a small part of what's available, it's beyond me why anyone would think that Jesus was anything other than a newer version of older god-men, in the way that all cars today are newer versions of the "Model A" Ford.

* * *
Did a historical Jesus exist?
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
[Excerpt]

ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

* * *
The Myth of the Historical Jesus
http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html

Do Any First Century Historians Mention the Jesus of Christianity?
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/josephus.html

Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?
http://www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/rise.php

Pagan origins of Jesus:
http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/index.html
http://geocities.com/christprise/
http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html
http://www.rationalresponders.com/a_silence_that_screams_no_contemporary_historical_accounts_for_jesus
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/pcc/pcc09.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/resurrection/lecture.html
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html
http://www.harrington-sites.com/motif.htm
http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa052902a.htm
http://www.apollonius.net/bernard1e.html
.

Answer 3

I am pagan but I do think he existed. I think he was a great man and a great carpenter but I think that the fish story kept growing and growing and before you know it the fish was walking on water and turning water into wine. I think that people needed something they could follow and there he was. The bible was written by a group of priests who decided what would be added to keep the believing. I think at this point they thought "hey! Lets add that he turned water into wine, Yeah! That will keep them following" Just my opinion, but come on the bible was written by Christian leaders to keep their congregations from straying back to paganism.

Answer 4

I think it's perfectly valid.

Of course, I'm pagan. (grin)

There was a book written that said "What if Jesus is the god-name of a local Adonis-Tammuz Dying God/Initiation Mysteries for the Jews?" And proved it intellectually well enough that I think Jesus never existed about three quarters of the time. But, of course, being Pagan, the existence of Jesus isn't exactly something that I spend a lot of time thinking about.

Answer 5

i'm on the fence as to whether or not he really existed. if he did, i think his story got blown way out of proportion.