Imagine this...

[Fake Messiah]

and like it or not in the official writing of josephus, jesus is mention as well in 4 other historical documents written by period historians:
https://dowym.com/voices/5-secular-non-b...-ministry/

Of the five writers:

1) Tacitus was writing about 80-100 years after Jesus' alleged death and not about Jesus either but a group which as far as we can tell were called Chrestians or followers of Chrestus (the oldest extant copy has a clear rubbing out of the e in "Chrestianos" and insterting of an i to make it "Christianos".  So no, not a reference to Jesus, maybe a reference to christians, though not likely.

2) The Babylonian Talmud was written after 200CE when christianity was an established religion in direct competition to judaism.  It mentioning Jesus has no bearing on whether Jesus was a historical figure, no more than books refuting the Hellenic religion are a proof of Zeus' existence.  Also, as a religious document, it is not "secular".

3) Josephus, see above.  We know he didn't write about Jesus and we can pretty much point out who inserted the references to Jesus in Josephus' works; Eusebius in c 325CE.

4) There is no evidence that Mara ben-Serapion wrote about Jesus.  That is simply a post-hoc justification by christian apologists to give a fake legitimacy to their mythology.  And the fact that he was talking about a Jewish king that was murdered by necessity precludes him talking about Jesus.

5) Pliny wasn't talking about Jesus, he was talking about a crazy cult known as christians who were causing trouble for the good governance of the provence he was Pro-Consul.  Not evidence for Jesus, no more than Bergoglio in Rome today is.

So Drippy your link is nought for five.  How does it feel to be constantly shown to be a luddite know-nothing mountebank?

Nice summary, but do you really think that Drich cares about this? If he did he would already know it, but he doesn't know, and he will never care.