Existence of Jesus

[Mark]

Make sence what you say there. But if he was an importent person for those who believed in him during that time. Then there atleast should some evidence left.

But as you say it was very long time ago and he didn't mean anything to the romans.

I however doubt taht he lived during that time, I also doubt that he even have existed. If he would get so much attention of the judean people during that time and if he was seen as a great threat of that time by the priests and noble, then surely someone would have wrote something about him. Some author of that time would have mentioned some guy called "the king of the jews".

Well, they did, didn't they, and it is these records that are recounted in the Gospels. I don't consider the Bible to be divinely inspired, mind you. I merely say that the Gospels provide a fairly consistent account of a historical Jesus and that they appear to be based on early written reports (you can read about it on wikipedia). There is indeed some evidence that Luke and Josephus are based on the same report.

Just because we don't believe in God is no reason to dismiss out of hand the purported historical accounts in the Bible. Nor is it necessary to dismiss these accounts insofar as they report Jesus the man, merely because they also report preposterous miracles. The ancients were very credulous, and that includes the Romans.