What first hand non Christian sources do we have? Surely you don't consider mentions by Josephus, Tacitus, et al, as being first hand accounts?
Your definition of first hand accounts and the scholarly definition of first hand accounts…also referred to as primary sources…are quite different.
'First hand account' just means a witness telling the reader or listener what what saw. It's not complicated. To witness means seeing the event.
This is not according to me, it's not personal definition. It's not controversial.
Your defense strategy is shocking.
There are many non-Christian primary sources that Ehrman references in his book that mention Jesus. He even asserts that “Historical sources like that are pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind” in reference to these documents of historical record that mention Jesus.
As pointed out, Josephus, Tacitus, et al, wrote what they had heard. They did not know Jesus, they had never seen him....and there is some controversy surrounding Josephus's account;
''The Testimonium Flavianum, a brief passage in Jewish Antiquities by Flavius Josephus (37 - ca. 100 AD), is widely considered the only extant evidence besides the Bible of the historicity of Jesus Christ. In the sixteenth century the authenticity of this passage was challenged by scholars, launching a controversy that has still not been resolved.''
There are zero of your definition of “first hand accounts”
of any ancient historical figure in existence.
There are examples, Plato was a student of Socrates, Plato knew Socrates personally wrote about the life of Socrates. The existence of Caeser is supported by multiple lines of evidence from the time period;
The evidence of a
historical Julius Caesar consists of several extensive mentions by the historian Sallust, (86-34BC); a biography by another historian, Suetonius (c75-120AD) as well as one by Plutarch (46-127AD). Chapter after chapter by the historian Appian (c95-165AD) relate complex chains of events in which Julius Caesar was intimately involved. There are the many other critically important mentions too, for example in the works of Cicero, Dio Cassius, Livy, Lucan, Valerius Maximus, Vitruvius, Catullus...
What is the epic story of Pompey the Great without Julius Caesar? What gaping holes would there be in the stories of Cleopatra or Mark Antony without Julius Caesar? Or for that matter of Octavian, Cicero and Cato? So much of Roman history depends upon this one man he is like the centerpiece of its history...
In addition, we can find numerous inscriptions and monuments, statues and coins. There is not enough material to satisfy my appetite, (I am still hoping for textual material to be rescued from Herculaneum) but there is, undeniably, quite a bit of historical evidence that a man named Julius Caesar did indeed exist.
But it’s OK with me that you choose to believe that the ancient historical record that mentions Jesus should be held to a higher standard than all of the other ancient historical records that mention any other ancient historical figure.
Still wrong, no matter how many times you repeat the fallacy.
