Mr. Bridges, my argument was not “The Jesus story is similar to other stories; these other stories are clearly myths; therefore, the Jesus story is a myth.” My argument was the Christ story in the Bible is in no way unique and fits the mold for man-god myths. That argument still stands, the story is not unique. It does fit the mold for many other “man-god” myths.

I also stated there was no “independent” evidence to support the existence of Jesus. Most of the New Testament books, including all of the gospels, were anonymously written according to biblical scholars.

According to biblical scholars, the single reference to Jesus in Josephus’ writings is a forgery by Eusebius, an early church father known for his belief that a lie for the sake of Christ was not a sin. The Tacitus quote is not mentioned by anyone, even Eusebius and Turtullion, both of whom frequently quoted Tacitus to bolster support for Christ, until 1468 CE. After 1468, it is constantly quoted. The style of the writing is not consistent with Tacitus’ writing, and most biblical scholars believe it is also a forgery. Affricanus was writing in the third century and says someone else said something two hundred years before that. That hardly qualifies.

The Romans kept detailed records and there was not a taxation or census the year Christ was supposedly born.

The New Testament contradicts itself numerous times about the life and death of Jesus. Try to write out the sequence of events that took place at and following Jesus birth and make sure the sequence of events agree between the four gospels. You can’t do it, because the accounts don’t agree. Even if they did, it still would not be independent evidence, every holy book makes the same claims about its god.

Tim Morgan

Graduate student

Veterinary pathology