What do you say about contemporary historians like Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger? They all seems to think that an originally uninteresting preacher named Jesus was executed (via crucifixion) by Pilate, and that this preacher was the inspiration of the religion now known as Christianity.
ETA: You asserted in your other comment that “Jesus was supposedly a very noteworthy figure who died in a noteworthy way.” I’d never gotten the impression that seditious preachers were noteworthy to the Romans or that crucifixion was a noteworthy method of execution.
The bit in Josephus was a complete forgery, likely inserted by Eusebius (well-documented as a chronic and unapologetic liar for the Church).
Neither Pliny nor Tacitus wrote anything about Jesus—they wrote about Christians, the existence of whom is not in question. Further, it’s well documented that Tacitus was tampered with.
The notability is that Jesus was claimed to be known to all, with scribes following him about.
Look, these objections really are standard, long-standing and pretty well documented. Reading up in the area is absolutely fascinating. Wikipedia is a half-decent start.
Josephus’s claimed writings mentioning Jesus can be divided into two groups: those universally agreed to be fraudulent interpolations by pious forgers like Eusebius, and those which look very much like such fraudulent interpolations but which people still disagree about.
Tacitus and Pliny both wrote long after Jesus’ supposed life and death and are just reporting what people of their times claimed to believe.
What do you say about contemporary historians like Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger? They all seems to think that an originally uninteresting preacher named Jesus was executed (via crucifixion) by Pilate, and that this preacher was the inspiration of the religion now known as Christianity.
ETA: You asserted in your other comment that “Jesus was supposedly a very noteworthy figure who died in a noteworthy way.” I’d never gotten the impression that seditious preachers were noteworthy to the Romans or that crucifixion was a noteworthy method of execution.
The bit in Josephus was a complete forgery, likely inserted by Eusebius (well-documented as a chronic and unapologetic liar for the Church).
Neither Pliny nor Tacitus wrote anything about Jesus—they wrote about Christians, the existence of whom is not in question. Further, it’s well documented that Tacitus was tampered with.
The notability is that Jesus was claimed to be known to all, with scribes following him about.
Look, these objections really are standard, long-standing and pretty well documented. Reading up in the area is absolutely fascinating. Wikipedia is a half-decent start.
Josephus’s claimed writings mentioning Jesus can be divided into two groups: those universally agreed to be fraudulent interpolations by pious forgers like Eusebius, and those which look very much like such fraudulent interpolations but which people still disagree about.
Tacitus and Pliny both wrote long after Jesus’ supposed life and death and are just reporting what people of their times claimed to believe.