There is certainly extra-Biblical evidence for Jesus; but it’s clearly a false assumption to assume that the New Testament authors…especially the eyewitnesses, who were documenting historical events…can’t be trusted because, as some skeptics have claimed, “they were biased.”
That’s like saying…outside of the multiple and independent eyewitnesses, and outside of the multiple and independent documents written by the eyewitnesses in the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses…”you have a very poor case.”
Put another way, does being at the scene of a crime automatically discredit your testimony as a witness…? Or…should it make you the most important person in the courtroom…?
The extra-Biblical historical writers who make references to Jesus and the apostle’s appear to have good historical information, and when you add up what they say about Jesus, you get a narrative that is congruent with the New Testament.
Yes, and especially when people from different continents say essentially the same thing.
