I've watched and participated in many debates on Jesus' existence. It seems that many skeptics expect to have absolute certainty before accepting that Jesus existed. It seems that they want every biblical detail corroborated with no holes or missing pieces. View the following clip for an example:
I don't really want to discuss absolute certainty because I presume that most would agree that it's not attainable. Not even science gives us absolute certainty so we shouldn't expect it for historical matters. But what I do want to discuss is the level of evidence that we should expect for Jesus' existence.
For debate... What type of evidence should we have for Jesus' s existence? (Please focus more on the nature and/or quality of the evidence and not on the specifics of it).
I don't really want to discuss absolute certainty because I presume that most would agree that it's not attainable. Not even science gives us absolute certainty so we shouldn't expect it for historical matters. But what I do want to discuss is the level of evidence that we should expect for Jesus' existence.
For debate... What type of evidence should we have for Jesus' s existence? (Please focus more on the nature and/or quality of the evidence and not on the specifics of it).
Last edited: