Today, most secular scholars accept Jesus as a historical, although unimpressive, figure. They are aware that much that is said of him, and by him, in the New Testament is no longer taken at face value even by scholars within mainstream churches, who either discount much of its material as inauthentic, or justify it by more novel interpretations. However, from about 1960 an increasing number of skeptics have come forward with denials of Jesus's historicity. In my first books on Christian origins, I myself denied it, but in works published since 1995 I am not quite as radical, although I still go further than critical Christian scholars in that I regard even the Jerusalem Passion and execution under Pilate as non historical, and am concerned to argue the case here. The more radical view that there was no historical Jesus at all is still vigorously defended by a few scholars, notably Earl Doherty and Robert Price.