https://lutherwasnotbornagaincom.wordpress.com/2019/09/02/does-the-catholic-church-believe-that-the-gospels-were-written-by-eyewitnesses/

https://lutherwasnotbornagaincom.wordpress.com/2019/05/23/bombshell-how-historically-reliable-are-the-gospels-if-even-conservative-bible-scholars-believe-they-may-contain-fictional-stories/

Yet when people use the argument that most scientists are evolutionists (not taking into account the scientists that don't speak agaisnt evolution, because many people who came to doubt evolution have been fired on that basis alone) to make evolution seem legitimate, it's suddenly good enough a rebuttal to all evidence against it. http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm, http://m.harunyahya.com/en/books/4190/The-Transitional-Form-Dilemma/chapter/5157/The-sudden-appearance-of-major-animal-groups http://www.studytoanswer.net/origins/abiogenesis.html#con

It was only known as Caesarea Philippi from a few years before the birth of Christ until a bit after 60 A,C.E. -- about the same time that Russia's St. Petersburg was called Leningrad.

Huh? There was a city in Russia called Leningrad during the first century CE?

Evidence of this can be seen in the beliefs, held tenaciously in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, of Mormons. They believe a great many things about the history of the US that are easily demonstrated to be untrue. In fact this appears to be true where and when ever we look at the formative processes of religion. I'm not sure why we should expect it to be any different with Christianity.

Do you think forgiveness, mercy, love, compassion, and caring were non-existent prior to Christianity? If you do, your grasp of history is somewhat more than just a little shaky.

"I cannot give anyone faith. It's not mine to give. I can merely speak on behalf of those that have it. I can't dispense it."

If you could dispense it, would you? If so, would that be because you think those of us without it would be better off with it?

"Most mythicists would claim to be agnostic on the subject, leaning in varying degrees away from an historical person."

I can't claim anything about most mythicists, but that describes my own position pretty well. It also describes the position of any mythicist scholar whose opinion I could respect. I believe that Jesus' nonexistence is less likely, to a significant epistemological degree, than his existence, but that is all. I think that anyone who claims to be certain of his nonexistence is basing his belief on something other than a careful examination of the pertinent evidence.

"How could this hoax have worked so completely and totally? "

It probably couldn't, but I don't think it was a hoax. I think it was a mistake. Mistake beliefs about history can be extremely tenacious, even when evidence of the truth is overwhelming and readily available.

You probably know Carrier has a new book out.

http://www.amazon.com/On-Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason/dp/1909697494

I hope it is going to turn up here at some point.