>>144922486>He was real,Pic related. The evidence for this is actually pretty thin, and the main problem is that most biblical scholars are Christian. Most of the non-gospel sources are actually second hand quotes that ultimately end up being just the gospels, and if you read Tacitus and Josephus' actual accounts word by word, you realise that there is a lot of inconsistencies meaning that it simply cannot be Jesus, e.g. being hanged instead of crucified, and not being from Nazareth at all. You should sift out religious scholars, and mostly look into secular historians' efforts tbqh. I encourage you to look more into this, I've come to the conclusion that it is really insufficient evidence to make the claim of an historical Jesus.
>MohammadThere is actual real historical evidence for Mohammad existing, from several accounts from that period.