Greg Ralls wrote:What a pathetic load of rot! I visited your URL the first time you posted it, repeating yourself doesn't make your claim any more valid. If you'd bothered to read the article in the URL I posted, you would realise that Josephus is unreliable, that the reference to Jesus in his writing was added by Eusebius in the 4th century, it wasn't in the original document. If the writing of Publius Lentrelus only appeared in the 11th century, how can it be considered to be reliable? Surely it would have to be written at the time of Jesus to be reliable.
So, as a Christian, I should strongly consider the opinion of a skeptic who wrote an article on the internet and cannot make up his mind on whether Jesus really existed?
Greg Ralls wrote:As for the other evidence that Jesus existed, I'd say the sources are dubious, because no other scholar ever quotes them, not even Christian ones! So, sorry mate, you're wrong again.
Christian scholars do not use these other evidences? May I remind you, it is a Christian site which supplies these other evidences. You don't agree? Then maybe you should take a look at the evidences other Christian scholars use:
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01.html
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/10/21/jesus.box/
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus_Christ
Greg Ralls wrote:You still can't prove Jesus existed, and I doubt you ever will.
You have not proven to me that Jesus Christ didn't exist.