Poison Pill: I find it fascinating that you just state something controversial (Tacitus is a forgery) without citing any evidence whatsoever!
I doubt I’ll convince you, because that would mean a major adjustment in your worldview, but for other readers I’ll offer this:
Even Bart Ehrman, famous New Testament author and NO friend of Christian causes, says this:
“I asked one of the prominent scholars of the Roman world, James Rives, who happens now to teach at UNC. Anyone who wonders about his credentials can look them up on the web; he’s one of the best known experts on Roman religion (and other things Roman) internationally. He has given me permission to cite him by name, as he is willing to stand by what he says.
My initial email question to him was this:
I’m wondering if there is any dispute, today, over the passage in Annals 15 where he mentions Jesus (whether there is any dispute over its authenticity).
His initial reply was this:
I’ve never come across any dispute about the authenticity of Ann. 15.44; as far as I’m aware, it’s always been accepted as genuine, although of course there are plenty of disputes over Tacitus’ precise meaning, the source of his information, and the nature of the historical events that lie behind it.”
https://ehrmanblog.org/fuller-reply-to-richard-carrier/
Likewise, Wikipedia dismisses the forgery theory:
“Suggestions that the whole of Annals may have been a forgery have also been generally rejected by scholars.”
I have yet to have any exchange with a Christian who would accept anything but evidence that corroborates their apologetic viewpoint. You cherry pick the evidence that suits you and you ignore the evidence that does not. This is dishonest. Your argument with Tacitus is a good example. You cite the quote and give the dates for Tacitus' life as if to suggest an original exists. But that work is not extant from the 1st. C. It comes from only one document that was written in the 11th. C. That is a gap of nearly 1000 years. This ought to give you some pause. It ought to beg a question in your mind, but it never does. Why? You only want to defend what already believe.