Top positive review
12 people found this helpful
This book deserves to be widely read.
on 26 October 2014
I am not convinced that the historical evidence Fitzgerald relies upon as proof of Jesus's non-existence, even in the mortal form of a typical failed messiah, fully proves that fact. Proving a negative is almost always hard. He does however prove pretty clearly that the historical evidence is even more feeble, confused and bizarre than many atheists (like me) had supposed, that hearsay, rumour and recycled mystical beliefs had an even greater contribution to it, and that the early history of Christianity and the Church was even more fragmented than is widely known. If there ever was a Jesus (and I will keep an open mind on that) then few people really noticed him at the time. That I think Fitzgerald does succeed in establishing. He does of course make many points that others have made before him, but that is not a criticism. If he did not then we would accuse him of missing the obvious.