Josephus never wrote of Jesus.
In all his many volumes of contemprary history there was a single vague refernce to someone that could have been Jesus.
This single reference is widely believed to be a forgery.
Care to quote?
The non-canonical writings of the bible could hardly be considered an historical source.
All they are is books of the Bible that were edited out at the Council of Nicaea.
He was a diciple of John and a Bishop of Antioch.
Might as well ask the Pope to vouch for Jesus!
For example?
They did.
Constantine (just as one example) wrote several letters defending the Church's position and stating that Jesus DID actually exist.
Why would he have to defend the story of Jesus if it was not disputed?
Jesus' existence was disputed as far back as early 4th century Rome (a mere 300 years after Jesus supposedly existed).
If this God-man walked the earth, and performed all the spectacular deeds he is attributed with, hell, even if he didn't and was no more than the founder of this HUGE new religion, would people be denying his very existence only 300 years later?
The people denying his existence obviously had enough voice and clout to deem a letter from the Emporer of Rome, so it wasn't just a handful of flakes or dissidents.
The very existence of Christ as a person has been a raging debate for almost as long as Christianty has been around.
Please do a little research and be prepared to offer evidence before you claim otherwise.
It may be your opinion that he DID exist, but it is fact that the debate has been going on for centuries.