(Continued to ensure we don't delve too far off topic in the other thread) The problem comes when you look at the sources. > Craig L Bloomberg is a scholar of the New Testament. He has a bias, as he already goes in believing that Jesus existed. He wants it to be so, as he is Christian. He also works at a religious school and believes in the complete historical accuracy of the bible. > John Dominic Cross is another New Testament scholar. He was formerly a Catholic priest. > John P. Meier is a priest and a biblical scholar > Bart D. Ehrman is a New Testament Scholar Two sources talk about Jospheus, who would have had no ability to know what he wrote about. >Mark Allan Powell (Ph.D Union Theological Seminary) is the Robert and Phyllis Leatherman Professor of New Testament at Trinity Lutheran Seminary. He is editor of the HarperCollins Bible Dictionary. > Maurice Casey is Emeritus Professor at the University of Nottingham, having served there as Professor of New Testament Languages and Literature at the Department of Theology. > Craig Alan Evans is an evangelical New Testament scholar and author. > Rev. Thomas P. Rausch, S.J., Ph.D., ... enough said there. A majority of these sources are people who have a vested interest in it being true. That's not how sources should work. It's essentially Christians saying that their religion is true. "Don't worry, a major part of our religion is completely true. Evidence? We said it is." Why can't we find any writings from non-religous people from when he was supposedly alive.