How did the writings of the NT come to be?

[Minimalist]

Neither Tacitus nor Josephus, in their discussions of the run up to the Great Revolt make any mention of a faction known as xtians in Jerusalem.

Josephus sees fit to mention the Essenes, who he estimates to number about 4,000 but not xtians?

Your xtians seem to be as invisible as your god.

[Brian37]

Neither Tacitus nor Josephus, in their discussions of the run up to the Great Revolt make any mention of a faction known as xtians in Jerusalem.

Josephus sees fit to mention the Essenes, who he estimates to number about 4,000 but not xtians?

Your xtians seem to be as invisible as your god.

Josepus was AFTER the the alleged life, so hardly a first hand account. And mention of Tactus is bogus too, because Romans were not only great senus takers, they would have their own independent written accounts of this alleged magic man, but Christians would have you believe they overlooked him. That would be like a republican skipping the chance to impeach a democrat.

But again, still bull in any case. Babies are not born of virgins and human flesh does not survive rigor mortis, so the second hand hearsey of Josepus is bologna.

We can prove that George Washington existed, but no sane person would claim he could fart a full sized Lamborginni out of his ass.

[Minimalist]

Josepus was AFTER the the alleged life

Yes, that is true but he was in the prime of his public life - and getting ready to take command of the army of Galilee - during the period of the run up to the revolt.

He discusses the sadducees, the pharisees, and the essenes ( who he numbers at a mere 4,000) but xtians are not even a blip on his radar?
Meanwhile we have these xtian apologists who claim there was a "church" in Jerusalem which was a going concern but does not seem to have been a factor as far as either Josephus or Tacitus are concerned.

Part of the problem with having limited sources is that we are stuck with what they reported and, in the case of Josephus we know that later xtian forgers fucked around with the text in order to try to give their boy a place in history.

They seem to have done a shit job even of that.

[Aractus]

And mention of Tactus is bogus too, because Romans were not only great senus takers, they would have their own independent written accounts of this alleged magic man, but Christians would have you believe they overlooked him. That would be like a republican skipping the chance to impeach a democrat.

What a flawed argument! Jesus' ministry lasted approx 1-3 years, then he was crucified. The Romans crucified Jews by the thousands back then. Where are all the other crucifixion records?

Christ wasn't high on Rome's radar, he was high on the radar of the Jewish leaders, but not of Rome. He had a small number of hand-trained followers, he didn't have thousands - or even hundreds of follows - at that time.

Hence there was nothing to "overlook".

[Cyberman]

So are you seriously proposing a Jesus who attracted a huge cult following, raised the dead, cured the leprous, the blind and the lame, caused so much trouble for the Jewish Elders to the the point where they broke their own sacred laws to try and eventually condemn the character on their holiest days, not to mention all the darkness and the George A Romero-style graves bursting open, yet he was so insignificant he was, to borrow your phrasing, not high on Rome's radar? Methinks I smell a plot hole somewhere.

[Minimalist]

The Romans crucified Jews by the thousands back then.

So now we have established that you don't know shit about history, either.

Watching Hollywood movies is no substitute for actually learning something, laddy.

[Brakeman]

The Romans crucified Jews by the thousands back then.

Citation needed!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDbPi_X2yUY

[pocaracas]

Speaking of [citation needed]:
wikipedia article on Crucifixion:

Crucifixion was used for slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. It was considered a most shameful and disgraceful way to die. Condemned Roman citizens were usually exempt from crucifixion (like feudal nobles from hanging, dying more honorably by decapitation) except for major crimes against the state, such as high treason.[citation needed]

Notorious mass crucifixions followed the Third Servile War in 73–71 BC (the slave rebellion under Spartacus), other Roman civil wars in the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, and the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. To frighten other slaves from revolting, Crassus crucified 6,000 of Spartacus' men along the Appian Way from Capua to Rome.[citation needed] Josephus tells a story of the Romans crucifying people along the walls of Jerusalem. He also says that the Roman soldiers would amuse themselves by crucifying criminals in different positions. In Roman-style crucifixion, the condemned could take up to a few days to die. The dead body was left up for vultures and other birds to consume.[citation needed]

Under ancient Roman penal practice, crucifixion was also a means of exhibiting the criminal’s low social status. It was the most dishonourable death imaginable, originally reserved for slaves, hence still called "supplicium servile" by Seneca, later extended to provincial freedmen of obscure station ('humiles').[citation needed] The citizen class of Roman society were almost never subject to capital punishments; instead, they were fined or exiled. Josephus mentions Jews of high rank who were crucified, but this was to point out that their status had been taken away from them. The Romans often broke the prisoner's legs to hasten death and usually forbade burial.[citation needed]

A cruel prelude was occasionally scourging, which would cause the condemned to lose a large amount of blood, and approach a state of shock. The convict then usually had to carry the horizontal beam (patibulum in Latin) to the place of execution, but not necessarily the whole cross.[citation needed] Crucifixion was typically carried out by specialized teams, consisting of a commanding centurion and four soldiers.[citation needed] When it was done in an established place of execution, the vertical beam (stipes) could even be permanently embedded in the ground.[citation needed]

If all these claims are true, the video Brakeman posted is a bit skewed.... but the wiki info is not that trustworthy, apparently. although, the Encyclopædia britannica mentions the same things LINK:

There were various methods of performing the execution. Usually, the condemned man, after being whipped, or “scourged,” dragged the crossbeam of his cross to the place of punishment, where the upright shaft was already fixed in the ground. Stripped of his clothing either then or earlier at his scourging, he was bound fast with outstretched arms to the crossbeam or nailed firmly to it through the wrists. The crossbeam was then raised high against the upright shaft and made fast to it about 9 to 12 feet (approximately 3 metres) from the ground. Next, the feet were tightly bound or nailed to the upright shaft. A ledge inserted about halfway up the upright shaft gave some support to the body; evidence for a similar ledge for the feet is rare and late. Over the criminal’s head was placed a notice stating his name and his crime. Death, apparently caused by exhaustion or by heart failure, could be hastened by shattering the legs (crurifragium) with an iron club, so that shock and asphyxiation soon ended his life.

Crucifixion was most frequently used to punish political or religious agitators, pirates, slaves, or those who had no civil rights. In 519 bce Darius I, king of Persia, crucified 3,000 political opponents in Babylon; in 88 bce Alexander Jannaeus, the Judaean king and high priest, crucified 800 Pharisaic opponents; and about 32 ce Pontius Pilate had Jesus of Nazareth put to death by crucifixion.

Just how much of this was inspired by christianity is difficult to assess.

[Minimalist]

Josephus also mentions that Alexander Jannaeus crucified 800 pharisees in Jerusalem. Given Josephus' penchant for inflating numbers we can probably knock a zero or two off of that.....if it happened at all.