Historical Jesus, Biblical Jesus

[Free]

It's been discussed here ad naseam that the records of the crucifixion in the gospels can be corroborated with what we see in the letters, Tacitus, Josephus, and numerous other texts.

Yes, it -has- been discussed, and is that all you mean then, when you insist that anyone who doubts the existence of a historical jesus is arguing against history?  Is it supposed to be an issue that people are critical of what those historians wrote?  Seems like due diligence to me.

All arguments are arguments from silence. None are qualified. 

They are arguing against the existence of Jesus as being but an ordinary man who's life was embellished by his followers after he was crucified. They claim he never existed at all.

-and there's a real mischaracterization....there could have been a million jesi grafted onto the christ myth.

Name one.

And thus ends that excursion into utter madness.