Please read a bit more carefully Steve. My post did not claim the quotes were at the same time as Christs life, but that with the spread of the faith, secular sources made mention of him. I am agreeing that there is not at present secular record of him, but IMO, the quotes a few decades after , confirm his existence and increasing influence, so as to then warrant mention from the secular and political angle.      As to the gospels giving different versions, first you need to demonstrate that the details can,t be harmonised . In fact there have been several harmonies of the gospels. Secondly, if they were in total detailed agreement you would claim collusion. Thirdly, most any event, would be remembered in different detail by different people. Fourthly, the Pauline letters are even earlier than the gospels. Fifth, were it not for the a priori rejection of miracle and supernatural, they would be in the same ball park of historical record as any other historical writing. The beginning of Luke, for example, makes it clear that he was setting out to outline carefully from witnesses the details of his life.                               The usual suspects claiming that I refuse to differentiate between belief and evidence , need only demonstrate that the data can only support their position, to prove that their position is not a belief. Shimrod, has already confessed that he can not do this, as he is not a biologist, and his own field is irrelevant to evolution. ( in fact, other than evolution itself, all of science can get along just fine without that storytelling ) they attempt to intimidate me by their science credentials, but appeal to authority...theirs or others....is irrelevant. What matters is the validity of the argument........always assuming an argument is made.....