ph2ter

1. Personal rating:
somewhere between +100 and +10

2. MJ reasons:
(I) Jesus fulfills OT prophecies, this is impossible for a real person
(III) If you go deeper into the past, the less you know
(III) Flesh-like Jesus is a theological necessity

3. HJ reasons
(I) Christians with their bias destroyed all the evidence that might exist
(II) Placing Jesus in a specific time and place and not in an undefined past (although this is probably a later invention not known to Paul)
(III) We can not be confident enough what in the letters of Paul is original and what is a later interpolation

ExMormon_Dude

+99 For MJ -99 For HJ:

MJ
1: The New Testament is a faith document riddled with myth, theology & pseudohistory. Assuming an historical core, rationalizing plausable elements & the use of criteriology is not correct historical methodology.
2. Most historicity arguments are derived from said Testament often used in circular fashion e.g. Paul said this about Jesus, Luke said that about Paul and the bible is true because the bible says so. Post biblical attestations are late and not very helpful (e.g. the pagan references). There's also a Jesus for every scholar.
3. No archaeological support nor corroboration for the existence of the majority of New Testament characters, specifically those closest to Jesus (unless we resort to the texts again).

jakejonesiv

Can we do a scale of 0 to 10, representing zero possibility of existence and 10 representing metaphysical certitude?

In that case, I would put Jesus at a 3 and Paul at a 2.

Jake