Reply #19: There's no particular reason to expect a Roman record of his crucifixion to survive

[muriel_volestrangler]

The only original documents from that long ago to survive have to have been in exceptional conditions - bone dry, safe from fire and so on. Any other document from that time would have had to be copied, and they didn't systematically copy everyday records. It takes far too much effort and materials.

The New Testament books are moderate evidence for his existence - mostly written within 50 years of his death, but by sources with an obvious bias. That they make miraculous claims does mark them as unreliable, but it doesn't mean they can be disregarded completely.

As I said in a discussion on DU a few years ago, people were making public claims, in several cities, about Jesus's existence and his crucifixion when people who had been adults in Jerusalem at the time were still living. It would be bold to completely make up a person and his life (and it would have been safer to place him a generation or two earlier if you wanted to avoid direct accusations of "I lived there; it never happened"). Though someone else pointed out that the chaos of the Jewish revolt around 70 AD might make it possible to get away with the claims.