RDI is science denialism, reminds me of Jesus never existed crackpottery

A popular claim among atheists is that Jesus never existed. There is NO evidence Jesus ever existed. NONE.

Bart Ehrman responds


Bart Ehrman observes that atheists who spend all their time around Jesus mythicists reinforce the the idea Jesus never existed. But if you follow the evidence and apply the methods used in understanding ancient history, Jesus existed. It's not even a debate. It's a crackpot theory.

from the standards of understanding ancient history, the NT and the writings of Flavious Josepheus, Tacitus, Pliny, etc., represent valid evidence for the existence of Jesus.

Paul was a contemporary of Jesus, and he states he met James, the brother of the Lord, and Peter. He is an eyewitness to Jesus' having a biological brother and a disciple Peter, and he clearly states Jesus was born of a woman, not born as a purely celestial being. From the ordinary convention of understanding ancient history, an ancient writer who is contemporary to the events and who is an eyewitness and whose writings are preserved, is evidence, sufficient evidence, that Jesus existed.

This debate reminds me of RDI science denialism. The claim that there is no evidence of an intruder murdering Jonbenet.

Since DNA is evidence, fiber is evidence, hair is evidence, shoeprints are evidence, forensic handwriting is evidence, unsourced tape and ligature are evidence, this claim has no scientific merit.