Since people try to pilpul around it.
>>9777307The earthquake was not some random one, but a heavy which there wasnt one alike in almost 70 Years
https://www.icr.org/article/greatest-earthquakes-bible/>The sedimentation rate puts this second earthquake about 65 years after the 31 B.C. earthquake. It seems that the crucifixion earthquake of 33 A.D>>9777308Claims the letter from Jesus is a copy from the Diatessaron. i looked that up, yet i couldnt find anything with ctrl+f'ing it. The only thing i found you can say is "copied" is the first sentenced
>Blessed are you who hast believed in me without having seen me.which is relating to the gospel of John where Jesus is saying
>29Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” That can hardly be said to have been copied from another, just referencing the same principle.
The guy who always brings it up refuses to provide any sources either way
Also its claimed that Jesus was inserted later in Tacitus in place of some other name. Pic Related.
what was done was that a single letter was changed, from chrestianos to christianos which you see under UV light, which may even was just a typo he instantly corrected himself. Regardless of when or who changed it, it spoke of a Chrestus/Christus, persecuted by Pilate who is the namegiver for the Christians. Its only Jesus that fits that description, wether it was written chrestus or christus. Even more so when its speculated that this is how you wrote the title originally
>>9777310Its claimed that the passage of Josephus was inserted later as the earliest manuscript seem to not have this one, but there is another passage
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus>Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the second reference to Jesus in the Antiquities, [...] which mentions "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James." 