Originally Posted by Wisdumb

. . .

These two sources are huge if you accept them as credible. We musn't forget that these holy books, although plagued with inconsistencies were essentially earlier man's version of history books. . . .

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Bigger than somebody who attracted vast crowds, and had to be eliminated because of the danger of a Roman backlash?

These things were not done in a corner.

Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson

There's no "sh" sound in Latin either.

Originally Posted by Wisdumb

Nope sorry Issa or Essa, however you want to spell it, is Jesus in arabic. Yesuh is another name for him in arabic. Even practicing muslims and religious leaders such as imams agree with this. Jesus of Nazareth is a prophet in Islam.
Perhaps if Jesus catered to the rich elites they would have mentioned him more in their writings, but he instead spent his time with common people. To say that since he wasn't included in historical documents written by romans is proof that he wasn't important at the time is proof you missed the entire point of his mission. He set out the fix the things he felt Judasim was doing wrong at the time, such as being too ritualistic. He set out to show people that to find God you could do it yourself and not necessarily through a religious leader. So in this sense, he was more of a problem to the Jewish authorities than to the romans. I believe he set out to persuade the Jewish people first, hence his apostles and followers, and after his death use them to spread it around the world. The romans did not view him as an important enough figure because he was more about challenging the Judaism than anything else while alive. Maybe that may explain why he is seldom ever mentioned.