Stating what believers state in no way offers proof that Jesus existed. Josephus for example mentions Hercules over a dozen times! These are not forgeries and go back to all of the oldest copies of his work. Shall we accept Hercules the son of Zeus really existed then?
1: So a minor joker like Jesus Ben Pantera merits several historical mentions but the messiah who walked on water and raises the dead can't get a mere mention anywhere? Lol!
2: We have a wealth of such documents so this is a lame childish argument. Are you suggesting the scrolls about Jesus Ben Pantera were more valuable than your messiah's? Lol! Way to insult your god!
3: Even your buddy Bart the former evangelical and current apologetic friendly agnostic (hardly atheist leaning) says there are far too many errors and contradictions in the bible to be taken seriously as historically accurate. Dave doesn't as a lol deist only argue that Jesus existed, he defends the words and myths about him and even Paul with the vigor of a Christian apologetic even using Christian apologetic arguments. More and more scholars are now saying the evidence for Jesus existing falls flat.
Care to fail again?
<quoted text>Tacitus was a Roman official and a historian, and did write that Jesus existed. Now it's true that Tacitus didn't live in the same time as Jesus, but then again many people who write factual accounts aren't witnesses of what they write.
Assuming that somebody from Jesus' own time just had to write about him is a thin assumption for two reasons.
1) Just because other people in a specific time period are written about does not necessarily mean that others are.
2) Just because we don't have anything from Jesus how long is a 2,000 year old document supposed to last?
Now let me add a third item of interest for consideration in this discussion.
Atheists say the bible can't be used to prove the bible which is good reasoning because that's a circular argument.
Dave Nelson claims to be a deist and still argues for the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth does not mean he is a Christian.
The entire Jesus as myth argument is just lazy and contemptible in my opinion, and here's why I feel that way.
When there's a mountain of evidence that most scholars agree on.