Dr. Robert M. Price vs Bart Erhman's tautological argument for the history of Jesus

 The Great Debate on the historicity of Jesus

Bart Erhman's argument is that 1) because thousands of people were crucified therefore it's not surprising no one heard of Jesus 2) Because the Gospel Mark was written in 70 AD and the letters of Paul in 50 AD therefore Jesus as Savior was based on the historical Jesus previously unknown. 3) Therefore all the "archons" and gnostic aspects of Hellenistic Judaism of the 2nd Temple enochian writing can be ignored

Robert Price counters that 1) assuming Jesus was real with no evidence makes no sense unless Jesus was considered too significant to be ignored 2) The significance of Jesus was precisely the same as the gnostic context of archons/eons/angels of Hellenistic Zoroastrian Judaism 3) The Gospels were later works of fiction based on that earlier syncretic context of the Essenes, etc. 

Erhman counters that Gnostics are actually just a 2nd century construct, not an earlier work - as is the "popular" view now. Price disagrees. Erhman is arguing that absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence but this same claim can be made for Bigfoot and ET aliens in UFOs abducting people, etc. Price argues in contrast that there is a great deal of detailed evidence for a largest intercultural context of the creation of Christianity. 

"We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant" comes from the early Christian text,

the Didache (Chapter 9). It reflects an early, possibly Jewish-Christian or Ebionite, understanding of the Eucharist, emphasizing Jesus as God's servant and the "vine of David"

It appears, as Price suggests, that most of what is known about Jesus came by way of revelation to Christian oracles rather than by word of mouth as historical memory. In addition, the major characters in the New Testament, including Peter, Stephen, and Paul, appear to be composites of several historical individuals each, their stories comprising a mix of events, legend, and plot themes borrowed from the Old Testament and Greek literature.

In the New Testament world, theology developed gradually along different trajectories, with tension between the charismatic ascetics such as Marcion and Thecla, as examples, and the emerging Catholic orthodoxy of such clergy as Ignatius and Polycarp. The tension is detectable in the texts themselves, many of which represent “heretical” points of view: Gnostic, Jewish-Christian, Marcionite, and proto-orthodox, and were later edited, sometimes clumsily, in an attempt to harmonize all into one consistent theology.

What may occur to many readers, among the more striking aspects of the narratives, is that the earliest, most basic writings, such as Mark’s Gospel in inarticulate Greek, are ultimately more impressive and inspirational than the later attempts by more educated Christians to appeal to sophisticated readers with better grammar and more allusions to classical mythology and apologies