Is that the best you have? Where's your evidence it's false? Now you want confirmations of the confirmation? ROTFLOL!
"We know next to nothing about Thallus or his works. We don't even know if he wrote only one book or several. The only information we have about him, even his name, comes entirely from Christian apologetic sources beginning in the late 2nd century, and that information is plagued with problems. Scholars since the 18th century have even invented facts about him,"
It's a bad source, unverified, no other actual historian of the time (there were many) recorded this event even though it would be world-wide.
And it appears to be a late addition by the church. If that works for you fine, but then you must believe the Roswell ufo crash, big foot and all sorts of strange phenomenon seeing your critera for evidence is so low.
ROTFL-ing until you pass out isn't going to make this a good source, a reliable source or a true source. But knock yourself out.
More absurdity. He wrote what he wrote. And that last denial (underlined) is a feeble attempt to represent (anonymous) support for your lackluster denial.
That's the problem, he didn't write what he wrote, a Christian apologist said he wrote a passage about an eclipse and earthquake. There is no actual evidence. This demonstrates nothing.
Had these events actually happened they would be in hundreds of historical records like every other eclipse.
There are secondhand accounts of all supernatural events including everything from Mothman to grey aliens in peoples bedroom. So you must believe in them as well.
"
Origen of Alexandria (182-254 AD), in
Against Celsus (Book II, Chap. XIV), wrote that Phlegon, in his "Chronicles", mentions Jesus: "Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events (although falling into confusion about some things which refer to
Peter, as if they referred to Jesus), but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions." He referred to a description by Phlegon of an eclipse accompanied by earthquakes during the reign of
Tiberius: that there was "the greatest eclipse of the sun" and that "it became night in the sixth hour of the day [i. e., noon] so that stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in
Bithynia, and many things were overturned in
Nicaea."
[2]"
You know, the long, long list of disciples, Gospel authors, early writers, and other people who have to be lying, mistaken, or charlatans in order for people like you to be credible is too voluminous to be believable.
No the list would be very short. The only original gospel is Mark, the rest contain literally pages and pages of verbatim Greek, this is how we know they were just copied from Mark.
The narrative was written from stories in the OT and the rest was made up using popular pagan religions that had their own savior dying/rising demi-gods.
Would people write extensive religious fiction? Of course they would, that's EVERY religion.
What do you think the extensive library of Greek gods are? Or the Roman gods? Or all the pagan gods? Those were elaborate stories about savior gods and were fiction.
Then we have Islam, Mormonism and so on.
There are no outside writers just 1 gospel, a bunch of additional fan fiction and Paul, who read some early scripture and decided he wanted to join.
The gospels themselves are anonymous and written in a highly mythical style used to write religions myths, parables and allegories.
"Strictly speaking, each Gospel is anonymous."
The
gospels of
Matthew,
Mark, and
Luke are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels because of a similar sequence and wording. They are also composed in
Koine Greek and the majority of Mark and roughly half of Matthew and Luke coincide in content, in much the same sequence, often nearly verbatim
"Most scholars hold to the two-source hypothesis which claims that the Gospel of Mark was written first. According to the hypothesis, the authors of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke then used the
Gospel of Mark and the hypothetical
Q document, in addition to some other sources, to write their individual gospels."
Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia