Quote Originally Posted by killerweed420
Any citations to prove the theory. Again Jesus was a very common name back then as so was Joseph. Its like me saying I've got a neighbour named Hitler. It doesn't mean its THAT Hitler. And part of the problem is these notationa you talk about are in Religious books. There needs to be more evidence outside of the religious community
Sure I've got citations, and I've already cited them! "The Annals" (or Annales in Latin), by Tacitus, is one of the most renowned and meticulous histories of the Roman empire that was ever written, which also happens to have been written by a very secular historian - and is available at any major bookstore. Likewise, Josephus is also an extremely noteworthy historian, well-respected by most biblical scholars and secular historians alike, and he was a devout Jew... a Jew would have had absolutely no reason whatsoever to fabricate the story of Jesus. (He also gives a much more detailed account about the miracles, crucifixion, resurrection, etc... which is pretty odd coming from someone who didn't subscribe to Christian theology.) But to save the frustration on both of our parts, I'll just list Tacitus, since he is the most widely recognized (and most secular) historian. There's probably a site somewhere that posts ancient texts like this one online, but I'm not entirely sure where you'd find it. What I'm quoting here is from an actual book... and I'll provide the full quote this time for context:

"Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, 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 Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, 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. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed." (The Annals: Tacitus, book 15, verse 40, translation by A.J. Woodman)

This biography was translated straight from the Greek copies of the oldest manuscripts by Alan Woodman (a professor of classic literature at the University of Virginia with a keen interest in Tacitus). His biographies are commonly regarded as extremely accurate translations, reflecting only the best of scholarship.

Tacitus wrote, in his own words, "Christus, from whom the name (Christians) had its origins." Once again, who else but Jesus of Nazareth would have been accused of starting such a "mischievous" religion and at that exact time? Tacitus even described some of the methods of persecution used by Roman emperor Nero against the Christians, because the Annals were actually written for the sole purpose of serving as a definitive history of Rome, and this particular book is documenting the time periods between the death of Agustus (in 14 A.D.) and the suicide of Nero (in 68 A.D.). There is simply no possible way that he was speaking of another Jesus, and neither were any of the other writers. The Jesus he was writing about was known as "Christos", or Christ. There's only one documented Jesus (who was also called Christ) in all of recorded history, and all of the writings indicate that He lived during this particular time period. Sorry to burst your bubble, but they were not and could not have been referring to any other historical Jesus... because there simply weren't any.

So, there you go, one BIG (and very rarely disputed) source of evidence outside the religious community. I'd list the others I mentioned for you, but you've made it clear that anything with religious undertones will probably just be ignored, and as I mentioned before, I'm not here for a debate. I just want to share the facts with you. If you'd like to read more about Josephus, Justin Martyr, Pliny the Younger, etc., just check out any bookstore, or Google. It may only be written history, but do try to remember that written and oral history is the only reason we know anything about ancient history today.

Take care.