[squirt]

why didn't a historian like Josephus say more about such an important figure of the first century? if Jesus did exist, one would have expected Josephus to have said more about him, it is unexpected that Josephus mentioned him in passing while mentioning other Messianic figures and John the Baptist in greater detail, from time to time some people have tried to deny the existance of Jesus, but this really is a lost cause, there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus did exist, and these hypothetical questions are really very vacuous and fallacious, Josephus was interested in political matters and the struggle against Rome, so for him John the Baptist was more important because he seemed to pose a greater political threat than did Jesus, these two references by Josephus are highly significant, especially since his accounts of the Jewish War have proved to be very accurate, for example, they've been corroborated through archaeological excavations at Masada as well as by historians like Tacitus, he's considered to be a pretty reliable historian and his mentioning of Jesus is considered extremely important