Lots of christian forgeries and similar claims like Josephus, Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, and so on. Google any of them. Or do you want me to copy and paste piles of info?
You can claim the passion narrative but unless you can produce evidence, like the Q document, it remains mythical. Ehrman tells us there were lots of fake gospels and books in the first three centuries of christianity before the bible was put together and it was a death sentence to own them. It's like me claiming that there is a document from 38 AD saying Jesus was a mad man and had no followers. Without evidence it is an empty claim.
"That is just an unfounded propaganda assumption." You do like your phrases. Why did the later John not use the early life of Jesus stories? We know the Herod story was lies because Jewish Josephus who documented Herod's many crimes did not mention the death of all those Jewish babies. There is also the point that Bethlehem was a short ride away from where Herod was and he could have checked himself without using those fake kings.
While there was a census, it was idiocy to claim that people had to return to their place of birth, which would have caused a year of havoc in the ancient world. A misreading of Micah 5:2 is said to be responsible for the Bethlehem claim, trying to make Jesus look like he was in the OT. He was not as internet searches on such claims will prove.
Eye witness stories are all the same (try writing down something that happened between you and your family without making it personal) but there are no eye witness accounts in the gospels. In a time where most led short lives, most would have been dead when the gospels were written and if any alive heard of them, they could be dismissed as liars. They are just stories followers are writing down, as hearsay evidence. Many were even openly made up, and known to be frauds. Some now like 2Peter are accepted now as frauds.
Did Jesus die on the cross? He had no worse than the two criminals with him (humiliation, scourging upto 40 strokes, etc). They were active enough to taunt him. Josephus tells of seeing a man he knew who was still alive after 3 days on a cross and petitioned to have him taken down. The man was and recovered but we are expected to believe that the healthy Jesus died in just several hours? Nonsense. An IDEA of mine is that they fed him mandrake root. Medicines were diluted with cheap wine, aka vinegar. Jesus had his vinegar and "died". Mandrake root can ease pain or put someone in a coma and the soldiers were not doctors and thought him dead without checking (the spear nonsense is a lie from "John", 90 years later. Then he was taken away, a hundredweight of the healing herb aloes used on him and he recovered sufficiently to walk 3 days later but still had those holes in his wrists and feet.
All his preaching and miracles and Jesus had just 12 followers and one of them betrayed him for gold.
I said a messiah had to be through the male line, not that he had to be male. Jesus did not admit Joseph was his father (he was in Luke 2) so the two ridiculous conflicting genealogies made up of Jewish royalty did not matter if Joseph was not his dad. They could say Jesus came from President Obama but that would not make it true.
You quote 3 lying apologists with crackpot qualifications. What evidence do they have? Is Jerusalem a christian capital now? Why are there still Jews if so many converted to christianity? Sure Jerusalem had lots of "foreigners" living in it, being a Roman garrison town, but they belonged to many different religions.
http://infidels.org/library/modern/rich ... kooks.html
Ehrman does give links which can be checked. You can deny them all you want but they are still there
All across Europe churches are empty, and they are starting to empty out in America. Sure people claim to believe in Jay-suss, but they don't go to church, don't pray, don't read the bible, don't behave as they are supposed to, etc. They are drifting out of christianity as it dies. They might believe in god as they believe in various superstitions but they don't believe in the church any more, with cases like Boston, the televangelists, various popes and their crazy ideas, local bad christians, etc.
http://www.churchleaders.com/pastors/pa ... erica.html
I still think the Q source is nonsense. There is no evidence it existed. It was made up to explain Matthew and Luke. If an atheist lies (and it is not a mistake), then like religious people they can be proved wrong. Sure I made a mistake on Jesus but how can anyone think he did not want to keep his resurrection a secret by not appearing to people like the Jewish elders and Pilate who believed him dead? One would think he was not there, like the REAL end of Mark (16:8) indicates and that his disciples lied that he had risen.
All we have is hearsay accounts of Jesus written by unknown people decades afterwards. Even were he an ordinary man who lived an ordinary life and died an ordinary death, they would not be trustworthy. But an impossible man? As Carl Sagan used to say: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", and there is no evidence for this impossible superman.