(November 26, 2016 at 2:21 am)Minimalist Wrote:(November 25, 2016 at 9:15 pm)Jehanne Wrote: I am certainly not claiming that Paul was accurate in everything that he wrote; however, the scholarly consensus is that Josephus referenced Jesus explicitly, Christian interpolations notwithstanding:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
Are you at all interested in having your opinion challenged or are you just wasting my time?
(November 25, 2016 at 11:32 pm)Jehanne Wrote: The Romans rarely mentioned anyone that they crucified, out of the many thousands who they put to death. Jesus was a trouble-maker, an inciter of riots during the Passover, an out-of-town stranger with delusions of grandeur. It did not take the Romans long to make an example out of him, something that they did almost daily.
And the evidence for that exists no where except in your useless gospel tale. Truly, there is only 1. Mark. The others are merely fan fics built on that.
I think your gosples are a worthless pile of shit in a historical sense. Now where do you want to go?
I am an atheist, bud. For starters, Mark is not the only Gospel that establishes the existence of the historical Jesus:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-document_hypothesis
In short, scholars have Mark, Matthew's unique sources ('M'), Luke's unique sources ('L'), the 'Q' document (both common to Matthew & Luke), the authentic letters of Paul, the three mentions by Josephus and the mention by Tacitus.