The birth date of Jesus Christ is one of the most important celebrations in Christianity.

But did the man responsible for the world`s largest religion actually exist?

Historians, theologians and secular scholars are agreed on one thing: he probably did. But beyond that basic statement - that a man called Jesus did once walk the Earth - they are divided.

To what extent his life has been exaggerated, mythologised and bent will almost always be impossible to prove.

This in-depth literature review by Alternet`s Valerie Tarico outlines five reasons scholars give that he did not exist:

- There is no first century secular evidence that he existed - all sources are either Christian or Jewish

- The earliest New Testament writings are vague on details of his life - they become more fleshed out in later texts

- The eyewitness accounts in the four canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are all second hand

- The gospels make contradictions about his life

- Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the `real Jesus` contradict each other

Furthermore, Raphael Lataster, a lecturer in religious studies at the University of Sydney, explained in an article for the Washington Post:

The earliest sources only reference the clearly fictional Christ of Faith. These early sources, compiled decades after the alleged events, all stem from Christian authors eager to promote Christianity – which gives us reason to question them.

Bart Ehrman, the author of Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth, argues that Jesus` fallibility is good reason for his existence.

The Messiah was supposed to overthrow the enemies – and so if you`re going to make up a messiah, you`d make up a powerful messiah. You wouldn`t make up somebody who was humiliated, tortured and the killed by the enemies.

/The Independent/

More about: