Look at this from the perspective of a believer: historians agree Jesus existed, and was a prophet type figure who was executed. But they don’t know much more.

Look at this from the perspective of a believer: historians agree Jesus existed, and was a prophet type figure who was executed. But they don’t know much more. They’re constantly trying add to that bare outline, but the additions are no more than speculation. This speculation changes frequently. The changes are based in trends in historical methodology unrelated to the Christian faith. Was Jesus a Buddhist? Did he travel to India? In the 1960s he did. Are these historians actually adding anything? It doesn’t seem they are. Historians can provide missing context. For example, when the demon says “I am legion”, it was probably not a reference to Roman legions. But there really isn’t a historical Jesus.