You simply can't prove it one way or the other, but even Bart D. Ehrman, author of Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth, whom you quote, believes that a man comparable to Jesus probably lived and Ehrman wrote a whole book on it. The main reason that Jesus (not his real name as this is a Greek name) was barely mentioned by other historians is that Jesus simply was not that important an historical figure until years later. He was just one of many Jewish itinerant preachers and most Jews rejected his teachings because his concept of the Messiah was in direct contradiction to the Jewish belief and the Old Testament in spite of what Christians would have you believe. It wasn't until Christianity took off among the Gentiles, who were largely ignorant of the Old Testament, that the Jesus of the Gospels was created.

That Jesus of Nazareth existed is not an extraordinary claim. Paul writing 20 years after the supposed death of Jesus describes the church founded by followers of Jesus, and names leaders of that church. It's true that Paul also makes extraordinary claims including that he saw the risen Jesus after Jesus's death, but his claim about the existence of Jesus is not hard to accept. My guess is that Jesus actually lived and died. I'm not big on the idea that he rose from the dead. That would require extraordinary evidence.

I'm going along with what Dan Barker says. that Jesus never existed, I listen to the experts about it, if he did exist, he certainly didn't walk on water or heal people, he was just a person.

I wouldn't doubt maybe some Jewish rabbi may have preached he was the Messiah etc. However all the miracles that's mentioned in the bible that he performed were all fabrication like countless stories in that time, also in my opinion I think the story of Jesus were made up of several rabbis during that period making it sound like one person.

I think he was a real person. He was born about nine months after his parents conceived him. He lived as an illiterate, itinerate preacher preaching to illiterate people. He was killed and his body rotted.

I read a lengthy article that said that Jesus did in fact exist. Of course, just the fact that he existed doesn't mean he was god. There's not any archaeological evidence, but that is common for people who existed at this time in history.

I just googled the topic and found this on the History Channel:
[history.com]

It is difficult to go back 2000 yeas and figure out what really happened. It is easier to go back 190 years and research the origin of the Book of Mormon. And just IF that Book is a time capsule from out of the earth as it claims to be, then Jesus really did resurrect form the dead.

Did not the Romans keep very good records of the population. The census at the "birth of Jesus" for example, therefore he should have shown up somewhere in Roman records.

This evidence is akin to people in the year 4019 digging up an old USA Today that includes a bit about how Scientologists believe in Xeno, and then shouting from the rooftops that Xeno is real and Scientology must have some truth to it.

And the Josephus claim is as if you dug up that USA Today, found an article about how a UFO crashed into the White House (but it is written in ball-point pen over a bunch of white out), and then consulted hundreds upon hundreds of years of UFO books subsequent to that article that referenced the article and author BUT NEVER MENTIONED THE UFO CRASHING INTO THE WHITE HOUSE. (While all other mentions of the "UFO crashing into the White House" is how a bunch of crazy people believed this insane thing, and one of them said that all crazy ideas end up in Washington D.C. where crazy people believe crazy things.)

Following is a list of important Christian authorities who studied and/or mentioned Josephus but not the Jesus passage:

Justin Martyr (c. 100-c. 165), who obviously pored over Josephus's works, makes no mention of the TF (Testimonium Flavium).
Theophilus (d. 180), Bishop of Antioch--no mention of the TF.
Irenaeus (c. 120/140-c. 200/203), saint and compiler of the New Testament, has not a word about the TF.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-211/215), influential Greek theologian and prolific Christian writer, head of the Alexandrian school, says nothing about the TF.
Origen (c. 185-c. 254), no mention of the TF and specifically states that Josephus did not believe Jesus was "the Christ."
Hippolytus (c. 170-c. 235), saint and martyr, nothing about the TF.
The author of the ancient Syriac text, "History of Armenia," refers to Josephus but not the TF.
Minucius Felix (d. c. 250), lawyer and Christian convert--no mention of the TF.
Anatolius (230-c. 270/280)--no mention of TF.
Chrysostom (c. 347-407), saint and Syrian prelate, not a word about the TF.
Methodius, saint of the 9th century--even at this late date there were apparently copies of Josephus without the TF, as Methodius makes no mention of it.
Photius (c. 820-891), Patriarch of Constantinople, not a word about the TF, again indicating copies of Josephus devoid of the passage, or, perhaps, a rejection of it because it was understood to be fraudulent.

Actually, this is largely wrong and demonstrated so by several experts on ancient history and literature. Check Richard Carrier's work among others.

I am surprised that you mention Flavius Josephus as a credible chronicler of anything portraying to Jesus as the mention of him in the Jewish Antiquities are definitely accepted as forged insertions
The fact that he wrote in detail about those times and there was no mention of this miracle man says a lot more.

I think the person lived and was put to death as a rabble rouser. As to the miracles, look up "Horus vs Jesus" for similarities. Most of the rest are nice philosophical words meant to help people feel better. And the god stuff -- fear meant to control the herds.

There might have been someone with ideas that are attributed to Jesus. But, how would we ever prove it, since there is no written record. But, something sparked my interest today, when again there is mentioned... that Christians were not well like! I have read that in the past, but until today I never thought much about it! I wonder if they behaved similar to how they behave today...then it would be no wonder that they were not approved of!

Here we go -- the week before Easter. Once again supposed 'historians' will trot out the 'but everyone believes it' stories and pretend that's evidence.

I get tired of seeing the same old evidence-less fantasies -- they don't prove anything. Believers still believe and doubters still doubt. But several times each year at holidays religious folks get to dress up and beat their chests to say 'see, we're still here'. What a waste of energy.

The life of a historical Jesus appears in no texts other than religious. If he had been an actual person of note, historians would've chronicled his life in exhaustive detail by now. They haven't for one good reason; he didn't exist so there's nothing to chronicle.

Because the story was stolen. At least plagiarized. He probably never existed.

Hmm..the plot thickens. I prefer to believe he is only an archetype, or someone who knew how to use his energy field to good effect.