[Winter wind]

Quote by: Zhavric Yeshua ben Pandira: [etc]

The proof is this guy named yeshu (ben-pendora). Very little is known about him. Gerald's hypothesis seems to be one of many about the mysterious yeshu. Considering the genuine lack of following in the academic community, this hypothesis is likely to be lacking in factual support. I can see why from reading his speech, considering how he presents his evidence.

"One account affirms that, according to a genuine Jewish tradition "that man (who is not to be named) was a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia." It also says, "He was born in the fourth year of the reign of the Jewish King Alexander Jannæus, notwithstanding the assertions of his followers that he was born in the reign of Herod."

The key word here is "one account"

As you can see. Most of his support springs from the assumption that Jehoshua Ben-Perachia was born in the fourth year of the reign of the Jewish King Alexander Jannæus. And that all farther testimonies about Jesus are about Jehoshua.

For instance.

"The year of his death, however, is not given in that account; but there are reasons for thinking it could not have been much earlier nor later than B.C. 70, because this Jewish King Jannæus reigned from the year 106 to 79 B.C."

One account fails in the face of many other accounts.

However, I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on this period of time. Nor that I fully understood all the support presented in Gerald's speech. I do think that it is telling that the experts in the academic world, many of them atheists, dismiss this theory as...garbage to put it lightly.

Actually, it should be Jesuses (Jesi?). We know today that the christ myth is based on not one man, but a group of rabble rousing rabbis from the late first century

"We know today?"
I'm not sure that's fair to say Zhavric. Most of the historians in the academic community say other wise.

I doubt very highly there was a "Paul" or that the individual writing as Paul had any clue about Christian doctrine (largely because it hadn't been fabricated yet). If you read the writings of Paul on their own, you find Paul to be woefully ignorant of Jesus' life. He doesn't know about the three wise men. He doesn't mention walking on water. He doesn't talk about anything from Jesus' life accept his death. Remember: we're not looking at a set of events that may or may not have been accurately represented. We're looking at hoax that was composited together over many decades by many different hands.

I would greatly appreciate it if you provided evidence to back this up.

I don't buy that the gospel Jesus existed. Are you familiar with the political climate of Judea circa 70 ce?

Also, could you post evidence that Tacticus was lying when he said that Nero persecuted Christians? It would help facilitate this argument.