Believing in evidence and logic, Believing in Jesus, Did Jesus exist?, Evidence for Jesus, Jesus the historical person, Jesus was not a pagan myth

#3: Is Jesus of Nazareth a Fairy Tale—a Legendary Copy of Pagan Myths? Part 1 (of 2)

(For much-more information about this blog, see the home page at https://reasonbasedfaith.com/.)

No, I didn’t forget! In February, I had intended to continue with “The Reason-Based Faith Approach, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection, Part 2.” However, I’ve decided to postpone that post because a friend reminded me that a significant number of skeptics and atheists today (especially young people attuned to the popular culture) think of Jesus as a mere fairy tale—not as a historical person, but as a legendary copy of pagan myths. Hence, they wouldn’t be particularly interested in details about the crucifixion or resurrection of a myth!

Thus, I’ve decided to use this post and the next to present a summary of the cogent evidence against this “Jesus as a myth” or “copycat” theory. (Since there’s such abundant information against it, I find it virtually impossible to provide a reasonable summary, supported by corroborative quotations, in just one post—unless I doubled its length, which would likely not be a preference for many.)

Although this theory is well-known in the popular culture, there’s no realistic or logical reason for anyone to believe it, since the evidences against it are so compelling. I’ve been well-aware of this for years, particularly from a number of sources. (E.g. Reaction to the New York Times Interview, Part 2; Jesus and Pagan Mythology; False Claims in the Popular Press; What about pre-Christ resurrection myths? Did the early Christians BORROW from pagan myths? Is Jesus a copycat of pagan gods? The Case for the Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ, by Lee Strobel, Zondervan, 2007, Challenge #4, pages 157-188; Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Christian Apologetics, edited by Paul Copan and William Lane Craig; B&H Academic, 2012; Chapters 10 & 11)

When I was an atheist years ago, this view was not taken seriously. (It had already been thoroughly discredited by scholars, by the mid-twentieth century.) Most people at that time believed that Jesus of Nazareth was a historical person and that he had (at a minimum) the basic characteristics attributed to him in the Gospel accounts. Even most skeptics and atheists accepted Jesus as a historical person and the main events of his life (in the Gospels) as historical, minus the miracles.

By way of explanation: a quick consideration of miracles

Parenthetically: as an atheist, I couldn’t stretch my mind around miracles; I couldn’t see how they were possible. I thought, “Everything operates by natural laws.” But as a Christian, I understand that God is the author of those laws (Job 38:33) and that one law is (essentially) that He can supernaturally intervene in a situation if He chooses to do so! The other laws are superseded by this one law if and when God chooses, like a federal law superseding a state law (i.e. a higher law superseding a lower law). This scenario is, at a bare minimum, logically plausible.

I also understand that the greatest miracle has already occurred: the creation of the universe. The majority of physicists today accept the “Big Bang” beginning of the universe as probable. (See A Beginner’s and Expert’s Guide to the Big Bang and the book by Dr. Jeff Zweerink, Escaping the Beginning? Confronting Challenges to the Universe’s Origin, RTB Press, 2019.) The beginning of the universe directly correlates with Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

I believe that God’s role in creating the universe makes sense from the perspective of the Kalam and other arguments, which we will examine carefully in subsequent posts. For now, I recommend this explanatory (and partly-animated) video on the Kalam Cosmological Argument and more in-depth treatments in Dr. William Lane Craig’s book, On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision (David C. Cook, 2010), Chapter 4, and on this web page: https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-kalam-cosmological-argument/.

My reasoning about miracles is therefore straightforward: (1) from many evidences and logical arguments, I understand and believe that the biblical God exists. (See my first two posts; upcoming posts will feature many more evidences.) (2) And since He has already performed the greatest miracle (the creation of the universe), (3) lesser miracles are, for Him, a piece of cake—very easy to perform. (Jeremiah 32:17) (4) Therefore, I have no difficulty in believing that God could perform the miracles in the Bible. Particularly for the New Testament, there are abundant evidences for its historical reliability, which we shall examine in upcoming posts. I recommend the scholarly book, The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Dr. Craig Blomberg; B&H Academic, 2016. Cf. Are the Gospel narratives legendary or historically reliable? Are there historical documentations of Jesus outside the Bible?

What exactly is the Jesus-myth theory?

The Jesus-myth or copycat theory was described by journalist (and former atheist) Lee Strobel, in his excellent book, The Case for the Real Jesus (Zondervan, 2007, reissued in 2016 in electronic and paperback editions, under a new title, In Defense of Jesus; I prefer the original title).

In Challenge (i.e. Chapter) #4, Lee explained that the theory is the claim “that Christianity’s key tenets about Jesus—including his virgin birth and resurrection—are not historical but rather were plagiarized from earlier ‘mystery religions’ that flourished in the Mediterranean world … that Christianity is merely a ‘copycat’ religion, recycling elements from ancient mythology …” (The Case for the Real Jesus, Challenge #4, p. 158, Kindle locations 2856-2858)

The theory posits that the story of Jesus was devised by attributing to a fictional character some of the miracles and characteristics of pagan gods. Therefore, Jesus was (supposedly) a copy of those gods and he (supposedly) never existed in actual history—he was just another one in a long line of mythological characters!

How many scholars believe this?

On a podcast, Dr. William Lane Craig made pertinent comments in this regard. A philosopher, theologian, and professor, holding two earned master’s degrees and two earned doctorates, Dr. Craig has engaged in many forums and debates with atheists, has authored or edited over thirty books, and is a well-known scholar throughout the academic world. In 1993, he had a famous debate with atheist Professor Frank Zindler that was broadcast live by 117 radio stations, from coast to coast in the USA! By the way, the audience of 7,778 casts ballots at the end of the debate; 82 percent of the ballots agreed that the evidence offered for Christianity (by Dr. Craig) was the most compelling. (These details are found in the Foreword, written by Lee Strobel, from Dr. Craig’s book, On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision, David C. Cook, 2010, Kindle Locations 91-116. The entire debate on video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuCA4rIX4cE.)

On one of Dr. Craig’s podcasts, a proponent of the Jesus-myth theory was quoted as saying that a growing number of scholars question or argue against Jesus as a historical person. Dr. Craig rebutted this by saying: “My initial response to that claim is that, if the number grew from zero to one, then it might be true to say a growing number of scholars doubts Jesus’ existence. The trouble is, when you read the article, this is one of those things that you just have to roll your eyes at. It hasn’t even increased from zero to one. It is still zero! … So the fact of the matter is that there are no scholars who deny that Jesus of Nazareth existed. People like Robert Price and Richard Carrier that are named in the article do not hold professorships at academic institutions or read papers at scholarly societies or publish with academic presses. There aren’t any bona fide scholars that hold to this extreme and, frankly, silly view.” (False Claims in the Popular Press)

This is the statue of “Christ the Redeemer” in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, but in an unusually-colored sky, near sunrise or sunset, since the “Belt of Venus” is prominent in the background. In a similar manner, proponents of the Jesus-myth theory like to characterize or color Jesus (the historical person) in a very unusual way (as a supposed pagan myth). Photo credit: Cerqueira, Unsplash.com.

An old, invalidated theory

This seemingly-new Jesus-myth or copycat theory is actually an old theory once held by some scholars in the 1800s and then abandoned by virtually all scholars in the twentieth century, when it was clearly understood that the supposed similarities were exaggerations based on slight, remote resemblances (or, in some cases, outright fabrications apart from evidence), and that there were cogent evidences opposing the theory.

What evidences? Here’s the first in my list: It’s virtually-certain from overwhelming evidence that Jesus was a historical person, not a made-up myth. Dr. Craig and other bona fide scholars regard the myth theory as “silly.” (False Claims in the Popular Press; Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, Crossway Books, 2004, Chapter 9, the section, “The Gospel according to non-Christians”)

The certainty of Jesus’ existence

This first evidence could be amplified or further explained.

Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, in their excellent, lay-friendly book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Crossway Books, 2004), present a cogent argument for the historicity of Jesus on the basis of no less than TEN non-Christian historical sources from the first and second centuries! (In Chapter 9, in the section, “The Gospel according to non-Christians,” pp. 222-223.)

These sources are Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian; Tacitus, the Roman historian; Pliny the Younger, a Roman politician; Phlegon, a freed slave who wrote histories; Thallus, a first-century historian; Seutonius, a Roman historian; Lucian, a Greek satirist; Celsus, a Roman philosopher; Mara Bar-Serapion, a private citizen who wrote to his son; and the Jewish Talmud. (See my remarks and quotations about Josephus in the second and third sections following.)

Of course, these non-Christians did not believe in the Christian writings that were later collected to form the New Testament. They thus didn’t quote from them. Instead, they presented facts that were known to their own culture.

Geisler and Turek’s reasoning is eminently convincing: “Just how many non-Christian sources are there that mention Jesus? Including Josephus, there are ten known non-Christian writers who mention Jesus within 150 years of his life. By contrast, over the same 150 years, there are nine non-Christian sources who mention Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor at the time of Jesus. So discounting all the Christian sources, Jesus is actually mentioned by one more source than the Roman emperor. If you include the Christian sources, authors mentioning Jesus outnumber those mentioning Tiberius 43 to 10!”

They continue: “Some of these non-Christian sources—such as Celsus, Tacitus, and the Jewish Talmud—could be considered anti-Christian sources. While these works do not have any eyewitness testimony that contradicts events described in the New Testament documents, they are works written by writers whose tone is decidedly anti-Christian. What can we learn from them and the more neutral non-Christian sources? We learn that they admit certain facts about early Christianity that help us piece together a storyline that is surprisingly congruent with the New Testament. Piecing together all ten non-Christian references, we see that …”

The list of 12 facts

Here is Geisler and Turek’s list of facts derived purely from non-Christian sources who wrote within 150 years of Jesus’ crucifixion:

  1. Jesus lived during the time of Tiberius Caesar.
  2. He lived a virtuous life.
  3. He was a wonder-worker.
  4. He had a brother named James.
  5. He was acclaimed to be the Messiah.
  6. He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.
  7. He was crucified on the eve of the Jewish Passover.
  8. Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.
  9. His disciples believed he rose from the dead.
  10. His disciples were willing to die for their belief.
  11. Christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome.
  12. His disciples denied the Roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.

(Cited from I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, Chapter 9, from the section, “The Gospel according to non-Christians,” p. 223.)

On this basis, Drs. Geisler and Turek wrote: “In light of these non-Christian references, the theory that Jesus never existed is clearly unreasonable. How could non-Christian writers collectively reveal a storyline congruent with the New Testament if Jesus never existed?”

Their inference is obviously true; it would be virtually impossible for non-Christian writers to collectively reveal this storyline if Jesus had never existed! Since they didn’t believe in the writings that were later collected as the New Testament, they HAD to have INDEPENDENTLY received this information from sources within their own culture; this is the only reasonable explanation. And this firmly establishes Jesus of Nazareth—the main subject of the New Testament—as a historical person, beyond the realistic shadow of a doubt!

I believe in the conclusions of Drs. Geisler and Turek. Considering these and many other evidences, I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist either! (As I wrote in my first post: the stronger the evidence is, the less faith we need to believe what that evidence supports or demonstrates to be true. The stronger the evidence is, the more rational and logical it becomes to believe something because it’s more likely to be true. If something is highly probable on the basis of evidence and logic, it’s easy to believe it—you only need a little bit of faith to do so! I call this belief “reason-based faith” or “RBF.”)

Josephus and Jesus

Who was Josephus? Dr. Edwin Yamauchi, an expert historian, has stated that, “Josephus was a very important Jewish historian of the first century. He was born in AD 37, and he wrote most of his four works toward the end of the first century.” (Quoted in The Case for Christ Movie Edition: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time by Lee Strobel, Zondervan, 2017, Chapter 4, p. 131, Kindle locations 1677-1678)

Skeptics question the main Josephus passage about Jesus because there were (according to most historians) three clauses that were likely added to the passage by an overly-enthusiastic Christian copyist! (Jewish Antiquities, book 18, chapter 3, section 3) Outside of this passage, there’s no indication that Josephus was a Christian, though the passage seems to be “dressed up” with the added clauses that make it seem so. The clauses, referring to Jesus, are: “if indeed one ought to call him a man” (implying he was more than human), “he was the Christ,” and “on the third day, he appeared to them restored to life.”

Some skeptics (especially proponents of the Jesus-myth theory) assume more—that the entire (first) passage about Jesus in Josephus was a Christian interpolation, which means that it was (supposedly) added to the manuscript of Josephus by a Christian copyist.

But the bulk of this passage has the stylistic traits of Josephus (according to Dr. Craig), plus the second passage in Josephus relating to Jesus—about the death of his brother James—obviously refers back to the first passage because it speaks of “the brother of Jesus who was called Christ [or Messiah].” (Jewish Antiquities, book 20, chapter 9, section 1)

Furthermore—and here’s a very significant point—the second passage was NOT likely written in by a Christian copyist because it contains historical information (about the death of James in 62 AD) that’s NOT found in the New Testament, a historical gem of information that the average Christian copyist would not be expected to know. And, of course, the second passage refers back to and thereby corroborates the first passage.

According to both Drs. William Lane Craig and Edwin Yamauchi, the consensus of scholarship is that both passages were originally written by Josephus, though the first passage (in all manuscripts) has the three clauses that were likely added by a Christian copyist. (The argument seems reasonable that these clauses would not likely have been written by Josephus, though it’s deplorable that a Christian copyist would do this.) Cf. Atheist Professor Frank Zindler on Josephus and a Christian response by Dr. William Lane Craig; The Case for Christ Movie Edition, Chapter 4, pp. 134-135, Kindle locations 1716-1737; Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Books, 1999, under “Flavius Josephus,” pp. 253-254.

Dr. Paul Maier’s version

Dr. Paul Maier, historian and formerly the Russell H. Seibert Professor of Ancient History at Western Michigan University, has edited out the additional clauses and restored what was likely the original wording of Josephus, as follows:

“At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah [or Christ], concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.” (From the scholarly anthology, Evidence for God: 50 Arguments for Faith from the Bible, History, Philosophy, and Science edited by Drs. William A. Dembski and Michael R. Licona, Baker Books, Baker Publishing Group, 2010, Chapter 27, p. 145, Kindle locations 2440-2444)

By the way, in Chapter 27, Dr. Maier states that: “…there is more evidence that Jesus of Nazareth certainly lived than for most famous figures of the ancient past. This evidence is of two kinds: internal and external. In both cases, the total evidence is so overpowering, so absolute, that only the shallowest of intellects would dare to deny Jesus’s existence.” (Ibid, p. 143, Kindle locations 2402-2404)

Other evidences against the Jesus-myth theory

My list of evidences continues:

• There was no causal connection between pagan mythology and Jesus’ disciples, who regarded pagan myths as abhorrent, according to Deuteronomy 7:25-26 & 12:1-3. Telling a story by using elements and features of pagan myths would have been a repugnant and horrible idea to their sensibilities; they would have never seriously considered it. If a first-century Jew somehow managed to do this anyway, other Jews would have regarded his writing as abhorrent! If this had occurred, Christianity would have never gained thousands of Jewish adherents, as it did in the first century. (Acts 2:41; 4:4) Eight of the nine New Testament writers were Jewish; Luke was the one Gentile writer. (Cf. Reaction to the New York Times Interview, Part 2; What about pre-Christ resurrection myths?)

• There is no evidence that the pagan mystery religions influenced the Jewish culture of first-century Galilee and Judea. Because first-century Jews found these beliefs abhorrent, there was very little influence. (Come Let Us Reason, Chapter 11, pp. 175 & 180, Kindle locations 3452 & 3525; What about pre-Christ resurrection myths?)

• The narratives and beliefs of the mystery religions changed over the centuries; what they believed in the third century may have been different than what they believed in the first century. (Come Let Us Reason, p. 180-181, Kindle locations 3526-3527)

• We know very little about the beliefs of these mystery religions before 200 AD because, at that time, their beliefs were kept secret and not written down! What they believed in the first century is, for the most part, a matter of conjecture. (Ibid, p. 181, Kindle locations 3530-3533; Dr. Nash is quoted from his book, The Gospel and the Greeks, P&R Publishing, 2003, p. 116; Was the New Testament Influenced by Pagan Religions? Accessed 2/11/2020.)

• There is evidence from the Roman historian Tacitus that the mystery religions may well have been motivated to copy elements from Christianity! (The Complete Works of Tacitus, Delphi Classics, 2014)

Dr. Craig explains more

Among scholars in the 1800s, the old “history of religion” school supported the Jesus myth theory. Dr. Craig commented on its collapse and supported the above evidences here: “…this [the Jesus myth theory] is over one hundred years out of date. The old ‘history of religion’ school collapsed in the early twentieth century and is no longer taken seriously by New Testament scholars, principally for two reasons.”

He continued, “Number one: it turned out that the supposed parallels were spurious. When you examine these so-called myths of dying and rising gods, like Adonis and Osiris and Thammuz and so forth, it turns out that they really don’t concern coming back to earthly life at all. For example, Osiris lives on in the underground world, in the nether realm of the dead. Or in other cases, these are just symbolic ways of portraying the vegetation cycle, the crop cycle, as the vegetation dies in the dry season and comes back in the rainy season. In no case does it have anything to do with a historical individual or actual resurrection from the dead. So that, when you do this kind of comparative religious work, it is extremely important that one be sensitive to the nuances and the details, and it turns out that there really are, outside of Judaism, nothing in pagan mythology that is truly parallel to Jewish belief in the resurrection of the dead.”

Continuing,“The second reason it collapsed was, not only were the parallels spurious, but there was no causal connection between those myths and early Christian beliefs. Jews were familiar with these pagan beliefs and they found them abhorrent, and so there is no trace in first-century Palestine of cults of dying and rising gods. And in any case, it would simply be unthinkable that people like Peter and James, the disciples of Jesus, would actually come to believe this un-Jewish and outlandish idea that Jesus of Nazareth was risen from the dead because they had heard stories of Hercules or Osiris or something of that sort, so that the causal link is simply missing.”

He concluded: “And so, pagan mythology has ceased to be, actually, a relevant category in the interpretation of the historical Jesus today. What has happened is what some scholars have called ‘the Jewish reclamation of Jesus.’ That is to say, scholars have rediscovered the Jewishness of Jesus! Jesus and all the disciples were Jews! And it’s against the backdrop of first-century Judaism that Jesus and the Gospels are to be understood, not against the background of pagan mythology. … And what has happened now with the Jewish reclamation of Jesus is that people are reading the Gospels against the background of first-century Jewish thought, and, when you do that, as I said, then the Gospels come out looking very good as historical sources for the life of this first-century Jew.” (What about pre-Christ resurrection myths?)

Einstein and the historical Jesus

Physicist Albert Einstein, an exceptionally brilliant genius, was one of the smartest scientists in history, and he believed in the historical Jesus! He stated: “As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”

He was asked, “You accept the historical existence of Jesus?”

Einstein replied, “Unquestionably. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. … No man can deny the fact that Jesus existed, nor that his sayings are beautiful.” (“What Life Means to Einstein: An Interview by George Sylvester Viereck,” The Saturday Evening Post, Oct. 26, 1929, p. 17, quoted at https://www.einsteinandreligion.com/einsteinonjesus.html, accessed 9/7/2019)

Therefore, those who believe in the Jesus-myth theory should ask themselves, “Am I as smart as Einstein?” This question is relevant because no new evidence supporting this theory has been discovered since Einstein made these statements! On the contrary, new evidence supporting the credibility and historicity of the New Testament (and thereby against this theory) HAS been discovered since then. The archeological discoveries of the Pool of Siloam, the Tomb of Caiaphas, the Erastus inscription (at Corinth), and the Capernaum Synagogue are notable examples. (Evidence for God: 50 Arguments for Faith from the Bible, History, Philosophy, and Science, edited by Drs. William A. Dembski and Michael R. Licona, Baker Books, 2010, Chapter 45 by Dr. John McRay)

Observations by Kenneth Samples

In a similar way to Einstein’s statement—that “No myth is filled with such life,”—philosopher and theologian Kenneth Samples observed that, “The Gospel accounts stand apart from mythical literature in both content and style. Jesus’ miracles, unlike the bizarre and sometimes frivolous ‘miracles’ of myth or legend, meet legitimate human needs and glorify God the Father. Resurrection myths about pagan deities (Osiris, Adonis, Mithras, etc.), often associated with fertility rites, bear no resemblance to the account of Jesus’ resurrection, nor do they have even a modicum of the Gospels’ historical foundation. What’s more, the apostles staked their very lives on the truth of the resurrection. No amount of torture could shake the certainty of what their eyes had seen. It seems reasonable to base our confidence on theirs.” (Reflections Blog: Addressing Resurrection Alternatives, Part Six)

I agree one hundred percent. The miracle accounts in myths are bizarre and often frivolous; they’re the types of “miracles” that people would invent in imagining anthropomorphic gods—bigger, more powerful versions of ourselves with typical human faults and moral weaknesses. By contrast, Jesus’ miracles, as reported in the New Testament Gospels, meet legitimate human needs and serve to sincerely point people to God the Father and His love, which is exemplified in the famous verse, John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (English Standard Version)

In March, I’ll continue with more evidence against the Jesus-myth theory, in Part 2. Since young people today, in particular, have been indoctrinated with this theory, more evidence should be brought to bear. And there’s plenty of it!

Recommended book

I enthusiastically recommend the lay-friendly but astutely-perceptive book, On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision by Dr. William Lane Craig (David C. Cook, 2010). My comments: this contains explanations of some of the best evidences and reasons for God’s existence, the historical Jesus, and the historical Resurrection. It also includes an explanation of apologetics, reasons why suffering is not a valid objection, reasons supporting Christ’s exclusivity, and some personal accounts of Dr. Craig’s life and journey. The chapters discuss these topics:

  • What is apologetics?
  • The difference it makes if God exists
  • Why anything at all exists—why there is something rather than nothing
  • A philosopher’s journey of faith
  • Why did the universe begin?
  • Why is the universe fine-tuned for Life?
  • Can we be good without God?
  • What about suffering?
  • Who was Jesus?
  • Did Jesus rise from the dead?
  • Is Jesus the only way to God?

Relevant web pages

Other good web pages

Recommended videos

Animated (or partly-animated) videos:

Other videos:

Recommended podcasts

Published by

Roger, a Christian and former atheist

My interests are Christianity, apologetics, theology, and philosophy, along with a significant appreciation for astrophysics, cosmology, and biochemistry. I used to be a very committed and passionate atheist who tried to persuade Christians to become atheists! However, I was challenged by a Christian to investigate and determine for myself whether there was actual evidence for the biblical God. I took up the challenge, found a number of compelling evidences, and, as a result, became a Christian myself! Now I'm blogging about my journey and about how evidence and logic point to God's existence and identity. I believe that this reasoning is cogent by means of many (over thirty) inferences to the best explanation within a cumulative case. (No knowledgeable Christian uses the obviously-fallacious "God of the gaps" reasoning.) If more Christians were familiar with this valid method of reasoning, I believe there would be fewer atheists--the evidences are that strong, especially when they are cumulatively considered. This method is supported by Christians such as William Lane Craig, J. P. Moreland, Victor Reppert, Paul Copan, Gregory Ganssle, Craig Keener, Craig Evans, Craig Blomberg, Michael Licona, John Lennox, Timothy and Lydia McGrew, Robert Spitzer, Edward Feser, Frank Turek, Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Kenneth Samples, Anjeanette Roberts, Jeff Zweerink, Michael G. Strauss, James Sinclair, Sean McDowell, Ravi Zacharias, Vince Vitale, Abdu Murray, Amy Orr-Ewing, J. Warner Wallace, Gregory Koukl, and Lee Strobel—among many others..

One thought on “#3: Is Jesus of Nazareth a Fairy Tale—a Legendary Copy of Pagan Myths? Part 1 (of 2)”

  1. This is really good. I liked how you put the post together. You opened up with a strong claim, however you backed up with really strong evidence that kept my attention the entire time. It also helped me understand what you were truly talking about. I can’t wait to read the next one!!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment