Opinion of people who think Jesus of Nazareth would be a "......." today

[afleitch]

It says "almost universal assent."  I'm willing to bet these scholars have done a good deal more research than you have.

Bear in mind that scholars of the bible, if they have faith themselves tend to be guilty of confirmation bias. The Bible does show, to the neutral observer, signs of it's own 'fabrication'. I am not in the business of giving as much of a sh-t these days to talk about it, (unless there's an asshat pastor on the street) but it's worth pointing out.

[afleitch]

It says "almost universal assent."  I'm willing to bet these scholars have done a good deal more research than you have.

Bear in mind that scholars of the bible, if they have faith themselves tend to be guilty of confirmation bias. The Bible does show, to the neutral observer, signs of it's own 'fabrication'. I am not in the business of giving as much of a sh-t these days to talk about it, (unless there's an asshat pastor on the street) but it's worth pointing out.

That's certainly plausible, but it's not always true.  I don't think one's faith should be considered a roadblock to their credibility as a scholar.  You could easily discredit non-Christian scholars who reject the evidence for the same reason.

It's not a roadblock to their credibility as a Christian Scholar no, but it can be a roadblock to accepting truths that test their faith. Most atheist/humanist people that I talk to about biblical scholarship in depth have tended to be people formerly in the seminary or studying theology who made that leap.

[afleitch]

This ridiculous thread is symptomatic of the level of discourse we have on here these days. It's worse than BRTD's snake handling thread.