> If the bible can make up exodus and fabricate Noah I have no reason to believe fabricating Jesus is beyond the pale.
From a historian's perspective, these are completely different sources, from hundreds of years apart. There has been a lot of analysis of their composition, which tell us what we probably can and probably can't trust about them. You don't discard a historical source just because it's a religious text. There are no absolutely trustworthy sources in history, but that they existed within a context, giving us some confidence in certain properties at least.
Of Pythagoras, it has been written:
> There is not a single detail in the life of Pythagoras that stands uncontradicted. — Walter Burkert (via Wikipedia)
Aristotle is only attested in other people's writings, produced after his death. We still think he existed. All evidence of Diotíma of Mantinea can be traced back to Plato's Symposium, where a handful of her ideas were recorded. Plato might have made her up, but there's reason to believe he didn't. We only have, like, four sources on Genghis Khan's life, and he was viewed as a deity for hundreds of years. Nonetheless, we're pretty sure there was a person called Genghis Khan who existed, and held the role in society that all these tales suggest he did (even if the tales themselves may not be true).
Very little is known about almost everyone. Jesus is not exceptional in this regard. If you say that Jesus didn't exist because there's not good evidence, you have to discard a lot of allegedly-historical figures for the same reason. (Or, I suppose, just make a special exception for this one guy.)
From a historian's perspective, these are completely different sources, from hundreds of years apart. There has been a lot of analysis of their composition, which tell us what we probably can and probably can't trust about them. You don't discard a historical source just because it's a religious text. There are no absolutely trustworthy sources in history, but that they existed within a context, giving us some confidence in certain properties at least.
Of Pythagoras, it has been written:
> There is not a single detail in the life of Pythagoras that stands uncontradicted. — Walter Burkert (via Wikipedia)
Aristotle is only attested in other people's writings, produced after his death. We still think he existed. All evidence of Diotíma of Mantinea can be traced back to Plato's Symposium, where a handful of her ideas were recorded. Plato might have made her up, but there's reason to believe he didn't. We only have, like, four sources on Genghis Khan's life, and he was viewed as a deity for hundreds of years. Nonetheless, we're pretty sure there was a person called Genghis Khan who existed, and held the role in society that all these tales suggest he did (even if the tales themselves may not be true).
Very little is known about almost everyone. Jesus is not exceptional in this regard. If you say that Jesus didn't exist because there's not good evidence, you have to discard a lot of allegedly-historical figures for the same reason. (Or, I suppose, just make a special exception for this one guy.)