Did Jesus exist, Part II

Therefore to scotch the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberious, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious superstition was checked for the moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judaea, the home of the disease, but in the capitol itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue.

The problem with Tacitus is that he is as in the dark as you & I. He was born after Jesus died, & can therefore only tell us what he himself has been told. By others who also also never saw Jesus

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, [if indeed one ought to call him a man]. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. [He was the Messiah.] When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. [On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him.] And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.

Why did Josephus never become a Christian, if he thought Jesus was the messiah?

I think that you mean that the rest COULD be genuine. So far as I am aware there is no good evidence either way.

Similarly Josephus, the Hebrew. For he says in the treatises that he has written on governance of the Jews: "At this time there was a wise man called Jesus. His conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."

The passage from Tacitus is also easily dismissed as evidence of a historical Jesus. Why would Tacitus doubt any of wha he wrote, if he got it from Christians ? Would he doubt that the sect had a founder ? That the sects name was derived from that founder's name ? That the founder of an "evil" cult was executed by crucifixion ?

What makes you think he hated them?

If Tacitus hated Christians he would be more likely to believe that the founder had been crucified - and more likely to publicise it.

Further, since he doesn't even bother to mention them anywhaere else, the feeling I get is that Christianity was not something he hated, but rather just so unimportant that it only deserved a passing mention.

a) Repeat a claim that Christians admitted to, indicating that their founder suffered a shamefiul death reserved for slaves and reels against Rome.

b) embark on a major project to try to prove that the foudner didn't exist

But to go back to the original point of the thread, the inclusion of this quote says nothing about the actual existence of Jesus but only a report that there were Christians (something not in contention).

And if you beleive that it would be easy for Tacitus to prove that Jesus did not exist then please explain how that would be possible.

What, from the report, gives you the impression that Tacitus is doing anything but reporting the position of Christians?