Historical Jesus, Biblical Jesus

[Dancefortwo]

They have a historical record of peasant named Christ being crucified by one of their Romans, Pilate.

That's "Roman" history, not Christian history.

Also, the letters of Paul existed before the bible, therefore they were extra biblical sources written by a contemporary in the first place.

Paul never met Jesus and didn't write about him until almost 20 years later.   Paul didn't meet Jesus anymore than Joan of Arc met Catherine of Alexandria from the 4th century.....which she claims to have spoken with in a "vision".    


"Roman" history.  Mmmm-kay,  provide the evidence.  Make sure it's contemporary Roman records though.   I'm not looking for something dedades later. I'm looking for contemporary accounts.   

Thanks.

I suppose using your logic that at sometime in the future just because people of the era who never met George Washington we should therefore assume he didn't exist? How about all the Caesars? How about Tacitus? Josephus? Socrates? Plato? Khan?

Tacitus also wrote about the Caesars, many who died before he was born, so should we assume they didn't exist because he never met them?

Your argument is meaningless.

We have contemporary evidence of George Washington. We have his written words which were commented on by his contemporaries while he was alive.  We have hundreds of contemporary documents of George Washington.  However, if 40 years after George died people started claiming he was the son of a god, had a virgin birth, defied the physics of the universe, walked across the Patomic without a boat and came back to life after death and those stories were based on almost two generations of storytelling by illiterate peasants,  you bet your sweet Aunt Martha's underwear I'd want comtemporary, unbiased, incontrovertible evidence of George and his miracles.