I had a lady teacher back in Religion class at the Roman Catholic high school I attended who introduced me to the latest in liberal, but misguided views on the Bible and Old Testament characters.
Similarly, Bill O'Reilly of Fox News, who also happens to be a Roman Catholic, who wrote a book called "The Killing of Jesus" advocated a difference between the Historical Jesus and the Jesus of the Bible. This is a heresy!
Basically, O'Reilly and modern "scholars" attempt to make a secular approach, which I would maintain is hostile to Jesus Christ's divinity, toward Jesus to be the "truth" about Jesus rather than the Gospels or even the prophecies about him in the Old Testament and in the future in the book of Revelation.
The idea that science is somehow "neutral" about religious topics is absurd. Secular approaches typically dismiss the supernatural and are typically quite biased about this topic. Furthermore, the idea that modern "science" has accepted the human-caused "global warming" or "climate change" hoax without raising the fundamental flaws in this earth-worshipping dogma shows that a consensus of scientific opinion, swayed by peer pressure and grant money, is not always the final word on issues of importance.
Wikipedia defines the term, "Historical Jesus" as referring to scholarly reconstructions (not open to the accounts provided in the Gospel) of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, based on historical methods including critical (i.e. often hostile) analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography, along with consideration of the historical and cultural context in which he lived.
Wikipedia notes some of the possible agendas:
"A number of scholars have criticized the various approaches used in the study of the historical Jesus—on one hand for the lack of rigor in research methods, on the other for being driven by "specific agendas" that interpret ancient sources to fit specific goals. These agendas range from those that strive to confirm the Christian view of Jesus, or discredit Christianity, or interpret the life and teachings of Jesus with the hope of causing social change. By the 21st century the "maximalist" approaches of the 19th century which accepted all the gospels and the "minimalist" trends of the early 20th century which totally rejected them were abandoned and scholars began to focus on what is historically probable and plausible about Jesus."
The problem for the modern scholars is that they can't bring themselves to admit the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible. Furthermore, they can't seem to admit that just because their evidence doesn't confirm something doesn't mean it didn't happen. The Bible and not Harvard, Princeton or Yale is the last word about Jesus Christ and the Bible itself. I Corinthians 1:22-23 NKJV notes, "For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom (Greeks represented a more secular approach to life similar to modern scholars): but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness..."
But it was and is the Greeks and their modern secular cousins who are foolish for their insufferably arrogant closed-minded approach to Jesus Christ and His Word, the Bible.
As Jesus said, "I am the Way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6
