(July 30, 2014 at 8:19 am)SteveII Wrote: The reason most scholars agree that Jesus not only existed, but was indeed crucified is the gospel accounts from 4 different groups of people, some mention of him from Josephus and Tacitus, but most importantly, that the early church would not have developed as it did had not a core of these things been true. This is called corraborating evidence and is considered very good evidence when judging historical events.
You all have your head in the sand if you think Jesus did not live, teach, and die on a cross.
I don't think you understand early church propaganda. If the church's core beliefs were based on truths as you say, there would've been no need destroy the works of it's critics or forge the works of early historians and other authors. The small mention of jesus in Josephus's and Tacitus's work is believed to be likely forged by Eusebius. The mention of jesus didn't show up in Josephus's work until centuries after Josephus died. Tacitus's work was much of the same. With that in mind your corroborating evidence is weak considering the only other reference for jesus is the bible/gospel accounts.