Originally Posted by Miburo
What is the actual historical evidence that Jesus existed?
I remember seeming some dude argue about this shit before, and most of the accounts of Jesus' existence seemed to be from people who weren't actually around when Jesus himself was alive. (For example, tacitus would have been born after jesus died.) Meaning they're all second-hand accounts, or hearsay. Which most people normally don't count as evidence. Talking about non-christian evidence here. I dunno about christian evidence.
I don't really care, because some wuss existing and getting his shit ruined roman style doesn't mean shit to me. Just saying.
Grabbing the Tacitus example, he wrote about the Christ and his followers c. 64. Considering that, if the crucification accounts are to be considered, Jesus died 28 to 34 years before that, so the probability of having some people that coexisted with Jesus are considerable.
Not that actually proves his existence, but between early Christians exaggerating the hell out of a prophet and them fabricating a myth that would create a gambit of people actually buying it (and Christianity is already full of flukes, like Origen of Alexandria, the Nicaean Council, the Discoveries and the Mayflower), I prefer the one that doesn't outright labels Christians as plain insane instead of grandly misguided.