1. there are no roman records of the crucifixion dating to the 1st century, every roman source scholars resort to comes from the 2nd century forward. utter silence about him and his claimed deeds pervades contemporaneous writings, unfitting of an extremely popular preacher whose alleged execution became such a massive public event involving the governor of judaea (matthew 27:11), an eclipse (matthew 27:45), an earthquake (matthew 27:51), and a zombie apocalypse (matthew 27:52-53). 2. the earliest secular mention of jesus is found in the so-called "testimonium flavianum," a blatant christian adulteration of flavius josephus' antiquities of the jews. this shows how desperate the christian community from the 3rd-4th centuries was over the lack of evidence for jesus, and how dishonest they were to tamper with historical documents and forge evidence. 3. the biblical accounts are wholly contradictory and unreliable, authors demonstrate a lack of sound knowledge about basic things: jesus forbidding divorce separately to women and men, despite the fact that women in his society could not get divorces (mark 10:11-12); a geneology of jesus tracing through the davidic line that purports 14 generations between david and jeconiah, which is inconsistent with the generational spread in 1 chronicles 3 (matthew 1:6-11); john's ignorance of the difference between aramaic and hebrew (john, 19:13); etc. 4. key pieces of information from the gospels have no historical basis: luke's absurd claim that the census required people to go back to their ancestral home (luke 2:3); the romans had no custom of freeing prisoners during passover (mark 15:6, matthew 27:15, john 18:39, interpolated in luke 23:17); the centurion had no reason to kill jesus (john 19:34) since crucifixions were intended as a prolonged method of execution, and neither did pilate to allow joseph "plot device" of arimathaea to bury him (john 19:38); etc.
United States