Archaeologists believe they've found cross of Jesus of Nazareth

[notadmblnd]

161. What about his contemporaries?

None of the literate contemporaries of Jesus know anything of him. The Jewish historian Justus of Tiberia who lived at the time of Jesus, do not know of him. (Tiberia was a place not far from Capernaum which Jesus often visited, according to the Bible).

The Jewish scholar and leader of the Jewish society in Alexandria, Philon of Alexandria (around AD 30 - 45) does not mention any Jesus anywhere in his texts. Philon was a famous scholar of the Old Testament and had deep knowledge of the Jewish cults of his time. He died ca. AD 50.

There is thus no real historical evidence of a historical Jesus. One would suppose that, a character like Jesus who according to the gospels raised the dead, healed the sick and annoyed both the Jewish establishment and the mighty Romans to such a degree that they finally had to execute him, one should think such a character would make it into at least some contemporary historical texts. Nope. No record.

In view of the evidence the only honest conclusion is that the Gospel's Jesus never existed.

That there once lived a wannabe-Messiah named Joshua (greek: Jesus) in the first century Palestine is more than probable. Roman sources tell of dozens of more or less religiously confused wannabe-Messiahs at the time, and Joshua was a very common Jewish name. But this could not be the Gospel's Jesus, not the Son of God, raising the dead, healing the sick, annoying the establishment, executed as a criminal, and then finally flapping away to heaven. All that stuff is pure mythical, and blatantly stolen from older pagan cults by the anonymous Gospel-authors.

http://www.bandoli.no/historicalrecords.htm