Let me make my position absolutely clear.
Based on the abundance of evidence from antiquity it was the Fall of the Temple of the God of the Jews c 70 CE that triggered the story of Jesus, the Son of God.
There was NO actual person called Jesus of Nazareth.
Non-Jews fabricated a story sometime AFTER the Fall of the Jewish Temple or after c 70 CE that the Jews KILLED the Son of God who came down from heaven.
After people believed the story was true it was altered and Jesus , the Son of God became the Universal Savior of mankind by Remission of Sins by Sacrifice.
The earliest story of Jesus the Son of God did NOT include Universal Remission of Sins by Sacrifice as is evident in the short gMark.
There is NO record of the NEW religion of the Jesus cult in non-apologetic sources until the mid-late 2nd century by Lucian of Samosata who noted that there were Christians in Palestine who worshiped a crucified man.
Lucian's Death of Peregrine
It was now that he came across the priests and scribes of the Christians, in Palestine, and picked up their queer creed. ............ The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day,--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.
There is simply no evidence at all of any story of Jesus in non-apologetic sources of the 1st century before c 70 CE and no surviving manuscripts of any source have been recovered and dated to the 1st century.
The surviving dated manuscripts about the Jesus story match the earliest known non-apologetic sources in the 2nd century.
It must be noted that all the Gospels in the NT have been found to be forgeries, that is, they were really later writings [ after c 70 CE] but were attributed to fake 1st century authors.
The recovered 2nd century manuscripts, the 2nd century non-apologetic writings and all the fake Gospels and Epistle authors do suggest that the Jesus story originated in the 2nd century and not in the time of Pilate.
) and soldiered on even if it made no blasted sense.
