The Jesus of history? The Jesus of religion? Are they the same?
The Jesus of history was not prophesied in the Old Testament. The Messiah was. The Jesus of religion seems to fit those prophecies. But the New Testament, as well known by scholars, was edited and redacted many times in order to make history fit prophecy.
The Messiah of the Old Testament was to be an earthly king, not a dying/rising savior god. Ask any Jew. After all, the OT is their book. They should know.
The name Jesus is actually Joshua or Yeshua and is a very common Hebrew/Aramaic name. There were many by that name in the first century of the common era. Pick one, add a prophecy, and you have a new religion. Borrow from the pagan religions by adding virgin births, stars in the east, wise men, and crucifixions and voila! You have a Catholic religion. Throw in a resurrection and the rest, as they say, is history.
No one--you, me, or the scholars--knows the truth about the person we call Jesus, the one who sits at the head of the Christian religion. But rest assured, there will always be those who claim that they do. They don't.
With that in mind, we can still look at the teachings ascribed to him and learn much. But then, we can do the same with the teachings of the Buddha. And if you are very observant and astute, you will notice the striking similarities in those teachings. Christ = annointed; Buddha = enlightened. Hmmmm.....
"But it says so in the Bible!" Sorry. You cannot use the book to prove the book. It's not only unscientific, it's irrational. The Bible is our best historical reference when it comes to Jesus, but it is still a human book created by humans to control other humans. And that's a fact. I don't have to take it on faith.