The Three-Headed "Jesus" Problem

[Randy Carson]

You are not entitled to your own facts. Josephus for one (he also mentions James and John) - and before you start spouting your BS: HISTORIANS AGREE THAT ANT., 20.9 AND ANT. 18.5 ARE GENUINE as I have explained to you countless times.

Listen you dumb fuck, Josephus XVIII is a major fraud and Josephus XX is a minor fraud.  I know that you can trot out all sorts of dumb shit xtians and their ass-kissers who have invented a "watered down" version of it but what you cannot produce is the watered down version itself in any text.  Neither can they.  It does not exist. 

The idea that a pharisee like Josephus would have anything good to say about fucking jesus is simply fit only for an asshole who is dead set on believing fairy tales.
That's you.  Dipshit.

Now, this is a scholarly work and as such contains lots of big words which will doubtless be hard for you.  Frankly, I don't give a fuck if you read it or not as you are plainly so far off the deep end that there is no hope for you.  But there are others here with intelligence.  For them, if not you,

https://www.academia.edu/10463098/Joseph...ry_In_Toto

In the end, it can be argued convincingly that the Testimonium Flavianum as a whole is a forgery and therefore does not provide evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth crucified during the reign of Pontius Pilate

Eat shit, Randy.

Let me get this straight...do you seriously believe that the writings of Acharya S will persuade real NT scholars that Jesus was a myth and that the Testimonium Flavium is a forgery in toto? How many have bought into her theory so far? That would pretty much be none, wouldn't it?

Drink up, Min...someone is always willing to pour you another glass and sell you another book.