And by holy book you mean the series of testimonials written years apart and gathered together as a sort of witness?
Arguing the historical existence of Jesus is a sad business, but inevitable, I suppose. It's counter intuitive relative to the claims and growth of the religion in the relatively uncrowded, backwater region where it began and has only been the fringe cry of a few looking for something like academic distinction unavailable to them else or another reason to justify their apostasy or want of address of the more pressing matter.
Say what?
Ah, I get it. The only evidence is what the Christian holy book says. To a Christian, who believes in Christian holy book, this make perfect sense.
Now, bear with me a minute, and try real hard to think what this means to a non-Christian. Why in the world would I, or any other non-Christian, accept your holy book as factual? Do you accept the Koran, or Book of Mormon, or the ancient holy texts of the Hindus?
If pointing to the "claims and growth of the religion in the relatively uncrowded, backwater region where it began " is any kind of evidence, then we all better convert to Islam ASAP, since it beats Christianity hands down in this regard.
I will ignore your "fringe cry" but- there is no real argument there at all.
