Rationalwiki Jesus myth theory

Notes:

Visit Rationalwiki's articles on Jesus for good amusement. Every claim they make to argue against the historical existence of Jesus are all long refuted arguments that have no basis in history or scholarship study of The Bible.

Their main arguments against the historical case of Jesus seem to be based on the now refuted myth that the records of Josephus and Tacitus were forgeries. Tacitus is fully authentic and only one passage in Josephus was shown to be tampered with, with historians agreeing that the rest is authentic.

Pathetically, the rest of the wiki's argument against the case of a historical Jesus seems to rest on the fact that the historians who mentioned Jesus, did so decades after he died and apparently this means they cannot be regarded as evidence. By that silly reasoning, we should reject the historical existence of half of the figures in history.

In any case, I think historians who lived in the 1st century only a few decades after Jesus, would know a lot more about that century and its persons (what with them having existing and living sources to go on) as opposed to atheist keyboard warriors two thousands years later whose only research into the historical existence of Jesus comes from reading Richard Carrier's heavily criticized books. So I think I'll trust what Tacitus and Josephus had to say rather than atheist666freethinker from Rationalwiki.