Several pages back someone had brought up Bart Ehrman to debate the validity of the NT gospels. Ehrman is one of the most distinguished skeptical NT biblical scholars in the world today. He has authored over 25 books and 3 college textbooks. I disagree with Erhmann on just about everything he has written and debated, save for one significant item. He defends the historical evidence for Jesus.
Bart Ehrman:
"This is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity....no scholar in a college or a university in the Western world who teaches ancient history, the classics, New Testament, early Christianity or related field does NOT doubt that Jesus existed. That in itself doesn't make it evidence just because 'everybody' thinks so.
"But, if you want to know about the theory of evolution vs the theory of creationism and 'every' scholar in every reputable institution in the world believes in evolution, doesn't make it evidence" either. But, if you have a different opinion, then you better have a pretty good piece of evidence yourself."
"The reason for Jesus existing is because he is abundantly attested in early and independent sources."
The authentic letters of the apostle Paul in the New Testament were written within a few years of Jesus' death and that Paul personally knew James, the brother of Jesus and also knew one of Jesus' disciples, Peter. Both James and Peter were eyewitnesses to Jesus. Ehrman dismisses the idea that the story of Jesus is an invention based on pagan myths of dying-and-rising gods, maintaining that the early Christians were primarily influenced by Jewish ideas, not Greek or Roman ones.
This "mythism" argument is readily used by most atheists and Ehrman concluded that it "makes them look foolish" to hold those views.