The manuscripts, all dated between 700 and 1200, are being made available to the general public for the first time, thanks to a collaboration between England and France.

And no objective evidence about Jesus ~32BC? The report should make you wonder about the scope of the Christian Faiths.

manuscrits-france-anglete...ky/en/content/accueil-en? mode=desktop

This is from England and France. Not Israel. Try to keep up.

(EDITED OUT) I think the report eludes to further speculation, but it is no fact about Jesus of Nazareth. As you know, there are so social records about "Jesus of Nazareth" on the planet other than the New Testament.

there are so social records about "Jesus of Nazareth" on the planet other than the New Testament.

Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome....

N.D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale, 1969), 19, cited in Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus (Joplin, Missouri: College Press Publishing Company, 1996), 189-190.

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

Pliny, Letters, transl. by William Melmoth, rev. by W.M.L. Hutchinson (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, X:96, cited in Habermas, The Historical Jesus, 199.

Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome....

N.D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale, 1969), 19, cited in Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus (Joplin, Missouri: College Press Publishing Company, 1996), 189-190.

No objective evidence about Jesus of Nazareth. correct?

And no objective evidence about Jesus ~32BC? The report should make you wonder about the scope of the Christian Faiths.

Ah Trolling again. In what world does the date 32AD, not BC fall between the dates 700AD and 1200AD. Jesus was not a medieval person. All objective evidence for Jesus exists earlier. I refer you to the Book; Evidence that demands a verdict, if you are truly interested

There is no question regarding the scope of Christian faith, only the scope of humans to understand it

No objective evidence about Jesus of Nazareth. correct?

The ancient Jewish general-turned-Roman-collaborator, Josephus, did mention Jesus as a religious figure. While some scholars think that the surviving text we have now was interpolated (by Christian writers/copyists) to make it more sympathetic to the Christian view, it seems the consensus is that the original unaltered text by Josephus did mention the historical figure of Jesus as a real living person of considerable reputation in Judea. You might dismiss him somewhat as an ancient Jewish Benedict Arnold but his writings are widely accepted as important historic records of the era.

Wiki: Josephus on Jesus

Given how much we base our knowledge of ancient Israel under Roman rule and the contemporary events of the era on the extensive writings of Josephus, this is historical testimony that cannot be easily dismissed. Put simply, Josephus is given historical credibility of the first rank, along with the best Roman historians and the writing/records of the Roman court.

I think it is simply mistaken for anyone, religious or not, to insist that there was no historical figure named Jesus. The evidence for Jesus is about as strong as anything we know with certainty about the ancient world.

Now, whether the teachings about Jesus are accurate or whether modern Christianity bears any resemblance to the religion of Jesus may be debated. But I don't think doubting that Jesus lived and was a real person can seriously be debated. Even traditional Jews, who have considerable animosity toward Christianity due to their history of difficulties with Gentile followers of Jesus (i.e. Christians), don't seem to seriously doubt that he was a historical person.

If you want to demand "objective evidence" for the existence and history of all ancient persons as you are trying to invoke against Jesus here, you can just throw out about 90% of what we believe we do know about the ancient world. Just how much stuff (writings, statues, monumental architecture) has survived for 2,000 years? Not all that much.

No credible NT or history scholar shares your “Jesus myth” mythology.

Oh my!