Surely it is much easier for human beings to identify and believe in historical figures and of their existence who are confirmed by actual dates and of place and time. So as Christians, we believe in the person hood of Jesus and His divinity. He is both 100% man and 100% God. But most His existence were mainly affirmed by people who witnessed the events, also by His followers especially the namely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John who were authors of the gospel.
Our faith and belief in the existence of Jesus is first made known to us from none other than the gospel. The Bible, encompassing the gospels is known to us Christians doctrinally as the sole authority for our Christian faith. Yet that Jesus whom we believe in is only known to us as the Divine Christ that once lived on earth has now ascended to heaven. Little sources are founded historically apart from the gospels concerning Jesus. Therefore the search for the historical Jesus, seems to be a good place to start if it can help us reaffirm and solidify our belief in Him is not just another mythical illusion.
The research for the Historical Jesus had begun quite sometime back years ago. Many who have tried to reconcile the Historical and Divine Christ together were not quite successful. This is because of their rationalistic view of Christ in regards to His divine attributes and miracles. So they throw out almost anything that is considered uncomprehendable or beyond mind of reason about Jesus, treating Him just like any other common man on earth.
So this Jesus whom we profess our Christian faith, should our belief in Him only to be dictated by Historical assertions? or having unshaken faith in Divinity of Christ just as proclaimed in the gospels? I would like to believe that both are not mutually exclusive but should go alongside in understanding. Having said that, the relevance of the historicity should not take precedence over the divinity of Christ but serve itself as a complement to it.
