If you look closer at the wikipedia pages, all that historians agree on is that a guy called Jesus lived around the time. That's not very convincing to me. "vir

If you look closer at the wikipedia pages, all that historians agree on is that a guy called Jesus lived around the time. That's not very convincing to me. "virtually" is a weasel-word. Elsewhere the claim is even stronger, but surely not all historians of the ancient near east are experts on--or even care about--this highly specific matter. The basic claim rests on two documents, Tacitus' chronicles of Rome and Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written more than half a century after the fact, rewritten (copied) many times. Both rather refer to early Christians and their believes, viz. "brother of Jesus" and that they were persecuted for spreading lies. To quote from your link: "the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate." ... this solves nothing.