With regard to the legend, of those 42 sources, how many actually met the man.
The author of Matthew was not matthew, and probably didn’t meet Jesus.
The author of Mark was Paul’s secretary, and probably didn’t meet Jesus. It is likely that Paul never met Jesus.
The author of Luke was commissioned by one Theophilus, and probably didn’t meet Jesus.
So many of the ‘sources’ are not sources at all.
So you think the ten sources met Tiberius?
I think you're probably wrong.
And for the record--Paul's meeting with Jesus is recorded in Scripture.
Oh, yeah. And...
(Tagline)
You seem to know a whole lot more about who wrote what than the authors of the notes in my study Bibles - maybe you should write one?
Especially on that road...
It sounds as if you have been reading too many of the irrational G.A. Wells' books.
“The author of Matthew was not matthew, and probably didn’t meet Jesus.
The author of Mark was Paul’s secretary, and probably didn’t meet Jesus. It is likely that Paul never met Jesus.
The author of Luke was commissioned by one Theophilus, and probably didn’t meet Jesus.”
Good to see that you have changed targets from Robert E Lee to Christ. And that your tactics haven’t changed even though you’re after bigger game.
Matthew and John were two of the original Apostles.
Mark was Peter’s amanuensis, not ‘Paul’s secretary’.
Luke accompanied Paul and is mentioned in two of Paul’s letters.
It looks like you’ve been memorizing all the greatest hits from your favorite atheist website. The usual junk that any good apologetics source can debunk.
Figuring out what really happened in the trial of Jesus is enormously difficult. Two surviving non-Christian accounts, one by Roman historian and another by a Jewish historian, confirm that Pilate ordered the execution of Jesus—but beyond that, offer few details. Writing in the late first-century, Tacitus offered this comment:
Christus [Jesus], from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, and the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.
The Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, writing in the 80s or early 90s C.E., indicated that both Jewish leaders and the Roman prefect played roles in the crucifixion of Jesus:
About the same time there lived Jesus, a wise man for he was a performer of marvelous feats and a teacher of such men who received the truth with pleasure. He attracted many Jews and many Greeks. He was called the Christ. Pilate sentenced him to die on the cross, having been urged to do so by the noblest of our citizens; but those who loved him at the first did not give up their affection for him. And the tribe of the Christians, who are named after him, have not disappeared to this day.
If Jesus appeared to Paul, then it’s impossible that Paul didn’t meet him.
To deny the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Christ, you must provide a more plausible explanation for each of the following:
Why the tomb was empty.
Why the followers of Jesus were despondent and depressed right after his death and then within days had regained their faith and during the years that followed were willing to suffer poverty, persecution, torture and death for their faith.
Why the enemy of Christianity, Saul of Tarsus, converted.
Why the skeptic James converted.
Why the reports state Jesus first appeared to women, who in those days weren’t considered credible enough to testify in court. Myth or invention do not explain this.
Remember—the resurrection explains all of these. To deny it with any credibility, you must provide more plausible explanations. It has never been done—neither by scientist, philosopher, skeptic nor charlatan.