The Virgin birth of Christ, along with the Resurrection form the bedrock, upon which the Christian faith was founded and I want to share some of the research I conducted more than 30 years ago when i was still researching christianity. I will start with the virgin birth of Christ.

The major problem with Christianity and many other religions is the absolute lack of independent confirmation of the stories, if independent accounts exists, believers are asked to disregard any story in conflict with the story presented within the holy book, so the holy book, becomes the source and proof of itself, an authority unto itself.

Now lets go back to the Virgin Birth. First of all I want Christians to understand that virgin birth is not unique and exclusive to Christianity, in fact among ancient religions virgin birth was relatively new to the Christian faith. Among the religions of the orient, virgin birth and spiritual birth of their Guru or Saviour was not only accepted as a possibility but as a fact natural to all Gurus.

It is a fact that divine births were so commonly accepted among ancient people that whenever they hear of one who has greatly distinguish himself, they immediately classify such a person as having been born of a supernatural lineage. The learned Thomas Maurice in his book called Indian Antiquities, goes far as to state that “in every age and in almost every religion of the Asiatic world, there seems uniformly to have flourished an immemorial tradition that one god had from all eternity begotten another god”

Now lets look at other examples of Virgin Births.

India has a number of messengers who were divinely conceived and two of them bore the name “Chrishna” or “Chrishna the Saviour” (note the similarity with Christ). Now Chrishna was born of a chaste virgin called Devaki, Who on account of her purity was selected to become the mother of God.

Buddha was considered and believed by his followers to have been begotten of God and born of a virgin whose name was Maya. Long before the Christian era, we read of how the divine power called the” Holy Ghost” descended upon virgin Maya. In ancient Chinese version of the story, the holy ghost is called Shing-Shin.

The Siamese (Taiwan), had a God and saviour who was Virgin Born whom they called Codom. In this very ancient story, the beautiful Virgin had been informed in advance that she was to become the mother of a great messenger of God, and one day while in her usual period of meditation and prayer, she was impregnated by divine sun beams. When the boy was born, he grew up in a remarkable manner, became a protégé of wisdom and performed miracles.

When the first Jesuit priest visited china, they wrote in their reports at finding a heathen religion of that country, of a story of a redeeming saviour who was born of a Virgin and divinely conceived. The God was said to have been born 3468 B.C (before Christ), his name was Lao-Tsze and was said to have been born of a virgin black in complexion and as beautiful as a Jasper.

In Egypt, long before the Christian era, and before any of its doctrine was conceived, the Egyptian people had several messengers of God, who were conceived through Immaculate Conception. Horus was known to all of ancient Egypt as having been born of the virgin Isis and his conception and birth was considered one of the three great mysteries or mystical doctrines of the Egyptian religion. To then every incident in connection with the conception and birth of Horus was pictured, sculptured, adored and worshiped as the incidents of the conception and birth of Jesus is among the Christians today. Another Egyptian God called Ra was also conceived by a Virgin.

I think I should stop here, because if I decide to go on the examples would be too many. But I want to add that even, Plato who was born in Athens in 429 B.C. was believed by the populace to be a divine son of a pure virgin called Perictione.
It is recorded in the ancient record that the father of Plato who was known as Aris had been admonished in a spiritual dream to hold pure and sacred the person of his wife, until after the divine conception and birth of the child that is to come and that this child would be conceived by divine means.

I dont get the point here

Gamine:

I don't get the point here

religious mythologies have a lot in common

bawomolo:

religious mythologies have a lot in common

Are you sure u've thoroughly studied wirinet's claims before endorsing them?

DavidDylan:

Are you sure u've thoroughly studied wirinet's claims before endorsing them?

oh wait, is there something i need to know about this wirinet guy

Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed.The effects and purpose of Christ have worked and is still working today.Jesus came to pay for the sins of the world.Many who have put their belief in Him have had their sins and its guilt taken away.He remains the Lamb of God that Takes away the sin of the world.He's willing to fulfil that purpose in you today.All you need to do is belive.Do not doubt.There's no harm in believing.You could have your sins cwashed from you today.

Gamine:

I don't get the point here

I am suprised you did not get the point. Then let me state the obvious point i am trying to make; that the virgin birth story was not unique or indigenous to christianity and that it was a borrowed concept from the far east, from which it entered the near east, from where the Europeans adopted it into their religions including christianity.

Image123:

Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed.The effects and purpose of Christ have worked and is still working today.Jesus came to pay for the sins of the world.Many who have put their belief in Him have had their sins and its guilt taken away.He remains the Lamb of God that Takes away the sin of the world.He's willing to fulfil that purpose in you today.All you need to do is believe.Do not doubt.There's no harm in believing.You could have your sins cwashed from you today.

I am shocked by your statement that Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed. It is amazing you are looking at the world though your tiny pin-hole. Are you saying that the over 1.5 Billions buddhist in the world (yes there are more Buddhists in the world than Christians)do not believe the virgin birth of their Buddha? or that the hundreds of millions of hindus do not believe in the Virgin Birth of their saviour Chrishna?

wirinet:

I am shocked by your statement that Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed. It is amazing you are looking at the world though your tiny pin-hole. Are you saying that the over 1.5 Billions buddhist in the world (yes there are more Buddhists in the world than Christians)do not believe the virgin birth of their Buddha? or that the hundreds of millions of hindus do not believe in the Virgin Birth of their saviour Chrishna?

This is total BLASPHEMY !
I wonder where you got your facts from. For me, i only know of the one written in the bible;which is the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

@wirinet

I am shocked by your statement that Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed. It is amazing you are looking at the world though your tiny pin-hole. Are you saying that the over 1.5 Billions buddhist in the world (yes there are more Buddhists in the world than Christians)do not believe the virgin birth of their Buddha? or that the hundreds of millions of hindus do not believe in the Virgin Birth of their saviour Chrishna?

While I do not particularly enjoy discussing stats (cos they aren't as important as they seem),I'll do that here for now.
I do not intend to slight you but your statistics above are invalid.What are your sources by the way?They are plain wrong.Buddha was not said to be born of virgin birth.He is said to have earlier in life, displeased his father, who wanted him to be a warrior and ruler rather than a religious philosopher.Also there are about 150 to 300 million buddhists around the world today.(do a reliable research on the net or somewhere to verify this figures).
There are about 900 million hindus in the world today while there are by far much more professed christians.I've never heard of 'Chrisna' but if you're refering to krishna,its a small sect under hinduism.
I said "Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed."
The stats prove that His birth is the most believed both now and from the ages past.His birth and life is the most historically valid.His virgin birth is the most useful.That is the centre of the Christian faith.(that Jesus was the spotless stainless lamb acceptable to God and sacrificed for not just the sin of his locals but for the sin of the whole world).Now that is a useful virgin birth.The other acclaimed 'virgin births' do not serve as much use.
The purpose of Jesus coming to the world is to save you.all you need to do is believe it.There's no harm believing.Make a bold step of faith.

this is total baabash and may God have mercy on the one who brought this topic
all those other claims you have are all heresies and the only and one virgin birth in the whole world is that of our LORD JESUS CHRIST
any other virgin birth is religious dogmas used to put people in bondage

@poster -i cannot imagine why ppl post such threads that only generate unnecessary argument which may not benefit anybody spiritually,if u r trying to promote ur orient belief fine but be open about it so dat right frm d start posters will knw what they r bargaining 4.Let me also add here dat there is no such thing as a superior religion or truth(all were at one time or d other willed by d most high)and frm d same source,it is man dat has brought about dis adultration nd confusion dat prevails today.In all simplicity every man should be concerned wit d purpose of life on Earth and how he can make it out of dis part of creation back to paradice his real home.This i believe is more imptnt dan questions nd contributions which r of no benefit spiritually.Peace

sanoosy. He posted it because it's true.

There is very, very little that is original in Christianity. There were many older religions that had virgin births, wise men, crucifixions, miracles, resurrections and the like, long before Christianity came along.

Take Mithraism for example. It was a religion followed by the Romans just before Christianity came along and it contained the following:

Virgin Birth.
Born in either a stable or a cave.
Visited by wise men bringing Frankincense, gold and myhrr.
Twelve Disciples.
Last Supper
Died on a cross and ressurected.
Followers ate the "flesh" and drank the "blood" of Mithras.
Mithras day was celebrated on the 25th of December and that's now the day that we celebrate Christmas. Even though the Bible tells us that Christ was not born in December.

And that's just one religion and just a small sample of the similarities it contains!!! Christianity also borrowed from a number of other religions as well.

This is total BLASPHEMY

No. It's total fact. Just because it doesn't agree with what you believe in doesn't make it any less true.

Some more similarities:

ATTIS - Phrygia: Born of the virgin Nana on December 25. He was both the Father and the Divine Son. He was a savior crucified on a tree for the salvation of mankind. He was buried but on the third day the priests found the tomb empty -- He had arisen from the dead (on March 25th). He followers were baptized in blood, thereby washing away their sins -- after which they declared themselves "born again." His followers ate a sacred meal of bread, which they believed became the body of the savoir.

BUDDIAH – INDIA: Born of the Virgin Maya on December 25th. He was announced by a star and attended by wise men presenting costly gifts. At birth angles sing heavenly songs. He taught in temple at age 12. Tempted by Mara, the Evil One (Satan), while fasting. He was baptized in water with the Spirit of God present. Buddiah healed the sick and fed 500 from a small basket of cakes and even walked on water. He came to fulfill the law and preached the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness and obliged followers to poverty and to renounce the world. He transfigured on a mount. Died (on a cross, in some traditions), buried but arose again after tomb opened by supernatural powers. Ascended into heaven (Nirvana). Will return in later days to judge the dead. Buddiah was called: "Good Shepherd," "Carpenter," "Alpha and Omega," "Sin Bearer," "Master," "Light of the World," "Redeemer," etc.

DIONYSUS - GREECE: Born of a Virgin on December 25th, placed in a manger. He was a traveling teacher who performed many miracles. Turned water into wine. Followers ate sacred meal that became the body of the god. He rose from the dead March 25th. Identified with the ram and lamb's and was called "King of Kings," "Only Begotten Son," "Savior," "Redeemer," "Sin bearer," "Anointed One," the "Alpha and Omega."

HERACLES – GREECE: Born at the winter equinox of a virgin who refrained from sex with her until her god-begotten child was born and was sacrificed at the spring equinox. He too, was called "Savior," "Only begotten," "Prince of Peace," "Son of Righteousness."

KRISHNA - INDIA: Krishna was born while his foster-father Nanda was in the city to pay his tax to the king. His nativity heralded by a star, Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki in a cave, which at the time of his birth was miraculously illuminated. The cow-herds adored his birth. King Kansa sought the life of the Indian Christ by ordering the massacre of all male children born during the same night at He. Krishna traveled widely, performing miracles -- raising the dead, healing lepers, the deaf and the blind. The crucified Krishna is pictured on the cross with arms extended. Pierced by an arrow while hanging on the cross, Krishna died, but descended into Hell from which He rose again on the third day and ascended into Heaven. (The Gospel of Nicodemus tell of Jesus' descent into Hell.) He will return on the last day to judge the quick and the dead. Krishna is the second person of the Hindu trinity.

OSIRIS – EGYPT: He came to fulfill the law. Called "KRST," the "Anointed One." Born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a cave / manger, with his birth announced by a star and attended by three wise men. Earthly father named "Seb" (translates to "Joseph." At age 12 he was a child teacher in the Temple and at 30 he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years. Osiris was baptized in the river Iarutana -- the river Jordan -- by "Anup the Baptizer," who was beheaded. (Anup translates to John.) He performed miracles, exorcised demons, raised El-Osiris from the dead. Walked on water and was betrayed by Typhon, crucified between two thieves on the 17th day of the month of Athyr. Buried in a tomb from which he arose on the third day (19th Athyr) and was resurrected. His suffering, death, and resurrection celebrated each year by His disciples on the Vernal Equinox -- Easter. Called "The Way, the Truth, the Light," "Messiah," "god's Anointed Son,' the "Son of Man," the "Word made Flesh," the "word of truth." Expected to reign a thousand years.

yes,

I think The Yoruba's Ifa religion has a similar story about a deity called
\ \ \ /
ORISHA AJE who was said to have come to the world for the sole purpose of redeeming humanity from sin, He was called Orisha Imole(deity of light), The Redeemer, etc

The account also said he was the only Orisha after Orunmila himself who raised up the dead.
He was crucified and and later rose to the heavens

Bastage:


Mithras day was celebrated on the 25th of December [/b]and that's now the day that we celebrate Christmas. Even though the Bible tells us that Christ was not born in December.

And that's just one religion and just a small sample of the similarities it contains!!! Christianity also borrowed from a number of other religions as well.

No. It's total fact. Just because it doesn't agree with what you believe in doesn't make it any less true.

Some more similarities:

ATTIS - Phrygia: Born of the virgin Nana on [b]December 25. He was both the Father and the Divine Son. He was a savior crucified on a tree for the salvation of mankind. He was buried but on the third day the priests found the tomb empty -- He had arisen from the dead (on March 25th). He followers were baptized in blood, thereby washing away their sins -- after which they declared themselves "born again." His followers ate a sacred meal of bread, which they believed became the body of the savoir.

BUDDIAH – INDIA: Born of the Virgin Maya on December 25th. He was announced by a star and attended by wise men presenting costly gifts. At birth angles sing heavenly songs. He taught in temple at age 12. Tempted by Mara, the Evil One (Satan), while fasting. He was baptized in water with the Spirit of God present. Buddiah healed the sick and fed 500 from a small basket of cakes and even walked on water. He came to fulfill the law and preached the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness and obliged followers to poverty and to renounce the world. He transfigured on a mount. Died (on a cross, in some traditions), buried but arose again after tomb opened by supernatural powers. Ascended into heaven (Nirvana). Will return in later days to judge the dead. Buddiah was called: "Good Shepherd," "Carpenter," "Alpha and Omega," "Sin Bearer," "Master," "Light of the World," "Redeemer," etc.

DIONYSUS - GREECE: Born of a Virgin on December 25th, placed in a manger. He was a traveling teacher who performed many miracles. Turned water into wine. Followers ate sacred meal that became the body of the god. He rose from the dead March 25th. Identified with the ram and lamb's and was called "King of Kings," "Only Begotten Son," "Savior," "Redeemer," "Sin bearer," "Anointed One," the "Alpha and Omega."

HERACLES – GREECE: Born at the winter equinox of a virgin who refrained from sex with her until her god-begotten child was born and was sacrificed at the spring equinox. He too, was called "Savior," "Only begotten," "Prince of Peace," "Son of Righteousness."


OSIRIS – EGYPT: He came to fulfill the law. Called "KRST," the "Anointed One." Born of the virgin Isis-Meri on [b]December 25th i[/b]n a cave / manger, with his birth announced by a star and attended by three wise men. Earthly father named "Seb" (translates to "Joseph." At age 12 he was a child teacher in the Temple and at 30 he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years. Osiris was baptized in the river Iarutana -- the river Jordan -- by "Anup the Baptizer," who was beheaded. (Anup translates to John.) He performed miracles, exorcised demons, raised El-Osiris from the dead. Walked on water and was betrayed by Typhon, crucified between two thieves on the 17th day of the month of Athyr. Buried in a tomb from which he arose on the third day (19th Athyr) and was resurrected. His suffering, death, and resurrection celebrated each year by His disciples on the Vernal Equinox -- Easter. Called "The Way, the Truth, the Light," "Messiah," "god's Anointed Son,' the "Son of Man," the "Word made Flesh," the "word of truth." Expected to reign a thousand years.

Is it not funny a lot of them were born on the 25th of December that's a little funny.

The virgin birth has been prophesied long before Jesus was born so its easy for the devil to quickly use that to deceive people and organise a lot of virgin births.

Not just funny but very suspicious.

wirinet:

I am shocked by your statement that Of all the above so called 'virgin births' and even the ones unmentioned.Jesus birth has proven to be the most useful,most valid and most believed. It is amazing you are looking at the world though your tiny pin-hole. Are you saying that the over 1[b].5 Billions buddhist in the world (yes there are more Buddhists in the world than Christians)[/b]do not believe the virgin birth of their Buddha? or that the hundreds of millions of hindus do not believe in the Virgin Birth of their saviour Chrishna?

Christians outnumber buddhists in the world. Do your research

brb

@ ndipe,
i think you are the one who needs to do your research well because i just asked for the total population of budhist in the world from wikipaedia and this is the answer i got,


Question: Total population of Buddhist in the world?




Answer from www.wiki.answers.com

Today, most Buddhists are birth certificate Buddhists. There are estimated 1.6 billion of this kind of Buddhists.

There are more budhists in the world, much more than christians. okay?

You're getting Taoists and Buddhists mixed up. Even taking into account the birth certificate theory won't give the Buddhists anywhere near that number.

There are nowhere near 1.6 billion Buddhists in the world. And Christianity is the most popular religion.

In 2000, the percentages were:

Christian - 33%
Muslim - 19.6%
Hindu - 13.4%
Non-Religious - 12.7%
Chinese Taoist - 6.4%
Buddhist - 5.9%

Christians constitute less than the percentage that is being ascribe unto them considering that most Europeans are not Christians. . . . .i used to think most Europeans were Christians until I came here. . . . .

Finland is a little different, mazaje.
They were very, very late converts to Christianity.

In the UK and most of Western Europe, most parents still have thier children baptised of christened into the Christian faith.
But you've also got to realise that Europe isn't everything. North and South America are also Christian and in general are much more staunch.

Europeans call themselves Christians but most don't practice or understand the religion. . . . . that's what I've observed here and I've been to so many European countries the only country where a majority of the people practice Christianity in Earnest is Poland of all the countries that I've been to in the European union. . . . .

The major problem with Christianity and many other religions is the absolute lack of independent confirmation of the stories, if independent accounts exists, believers are asked to disregard any story in conflict with the story presented within the holy book, so the holy book, becomes the source and proof of itself, an authority unto itself.

This is your personal opinion and unfortunately very untrue.
There are independenct confirmation of the stories, all you have to do is check with history, and I mean non-christian sources. The Romans documented well the dealings of that time, and so did the Jews, the proof is there, you just have to let go of laziness and get the right sources. You will find it. Truth is never false and it has no reason to hide itself.

Believers are not asked to disregard anything, the Holy Book is not the only source, infact the Church is the authority and the Holy Book receives its authority from the Church, as the Holy Book calls the Church the "pillar and foundation of truth" and upon this the Church compiled the book, because of the authority of the Church the book came to be, so sir if you want to challenge the authority of the book, you will have to challenge the authority of the Church. Seeing that the Church is made up of people who are of themselves independent, and that the writings of independent witnesses during the time of Jesus are well kept by the Church, your claim of lack of independent witnesses goes out the window.

Please do your research properly before you make claim. THANK YOU!!

man this thread is being given an undue attention
those things being mentioned if you are to look at it very well are just an imitation of the birth of Jesus Christ
its a technique of the devil to lead people astray and unfortunately people are falling badly for it

~Lady~:

This is your personal opinion and unfortunately very untrue.
There are independenct confirmation of the stories, all you have to do is check with history, and I mean non-christian sources. The Romans documented well the dealings of that time, and so did the Jews, the proof is there, you just have to let go of laziness and get the right sources. You will find it. Truth is never false and it has no reason to hide itself.

Believers are not asked to disregard anything, the Holy Book is not the only source, infact the Church is the authority and the Holy Book receives its authority from the Church, as the Holy Book calls the Church the "pillar and foundation of truth" and upon this the Church compiled the book, because of the authority of the Church the book came to be, so sir if you want to challenge the authority of the book, you will have to challenge the authority of the Church. Seeing that the Church is made up of people who are of themselves independent, and that the writings of independent witnesses during the time of Jesus are well kept by the Church, your claim of lack of independent witnesses goes out the window.

Please do your research properly before you make claim. THANK YOU!!

Although, i have not done amy research lately, as i do not have time nowadays, I did an awful lot of research in my university days, so i am writing from memory.

But one fact i am very sure of is that there are very few independent collaboration of biblical stories.
The Romans had no official record regarding the activities of Jesus Christ which is odd, as his execution must have been approved from rome. The only other person that mentioned someone close to christ was the Jewish historian Josephus Flavius.

The only other person that mentioned someone close to christ was the Jewish historian Josephus Flavius.

Correct. One sentence in a lifetime's worth of writing and that sentence has been exposed as a hoax that was added on long after Josephus' death.
Apart from that, there is absolutely nothing in any record, anywhere, that mentions Christ outside of the Bible.

@Lady. If you have any records that prove otherwise, I would be delighted to see them. But alas, wirinet is absolutely spot on with his assertion and I fear you can provide nothing.

If Jesus lived around the time it is claimed by Christians and had performed all the activities attributed to him, it is a great surprise that no independent accounts so much as mentions him.  If he performs all these great acts, why are there no accounts contemporaneous with his life and and works.  These are the things one would have expected to find in other independent accounts:

1)   His birth

- Accounts of the star that guided the wise men
- Account of the slaughter of the innocent children by Herod
- Accounts of the census conducted by Quirinius on 4BCE
- Account of massive movements of population to register for the census
- Accounts of his family and their specialness

2)  His life and works (his ministry)

- Accounts of this visiting the temple and causing a commotion there
- Accounts of the unrest he occasioned
-Accounts of the miracles he performed


3)  His death

- Accounts of his trials by the Sahandrins and Romans
- Accounts of this sentencing
- Accounts of this death
- Accounts of the resurrection of the saints
- Accounts of his resurrection
- Accounts of his activities post-resurrection

4) His ascension into heaven


If this man was really significant, how come nobody saw it fit to mention him even once while he walked the earth.  And it was not as if this period was devoid of chroniclers.  There were many historians active around this period who you might have expected to have recorded his activities. Philo was particularly active in this period but fails to mention him. This is quite telling.

Josephus's work appears to mention Jesus but this account has many problems.  First, it was written decades after Jesus and secondly the passages that refer to Jesus appear to have been doctored by Christian scholars.

Pliny, writing in the middle of the 2nd century mentions Christians as followers of a man called Jesus.  But this only testified to the existence of Christians rather that the existence of Jesus.

If fact, there is a widepread Jewish and Jewish-Christian tradition, attested in Epiphanius, the Talmud and the Toledoth Jeschu (dependent onn 2nd century Jewish-Christian gospel), that Jesus was born about 100BCE and was crucified under Alexander Jannaeus.

So if anyone has any account of an independent evidence of Jesus, let them present it here.

Huxley.
Although I agree with you in the main, at least one point you've posted has been proven or pretty well accounted for. I've read that astronomers have matched an astronomical alignment of some sort with the supposed year of Jesus' birth for example.

But in general, you're absolutely correct and there is one thing you've mentioned that needs further clarification.

3) His death

- Accounts of his trials by the Sahandrins and Romans
- Accounts of this sentencing
- Accounts of this death

One should note that Jesus was executed by Crucifixion. This was a punishment that was only carried out on slaves, rebels, pirates and especially-despised enemies and criminals of the Roman Empire. It was not an execution method carried out on Jewish citizens. As Jesus was condemned by Jews (or so the Bible tells us), his death would have been that of stoning.
But as the Bible tells us that he was crucified, one can only assume that he was executed as an enemy of the Roman Empire. Not what the Bible tells us.
If this was the case, there would have been a record of the execution. The Romans were the documentors of their day - they would most certainly have recorded the crucifixion of Jesus. Not in just a single document, but in many. This plainly never occured - thus pointing to the fact that a Jesus as depicted in the Bible was never cruciified under Roman rule.

Bastage:

Huxley.
Although I agree with you in the main, at least one point you've posted has been proven or pretty well accounted for. I've read that astronomers have matched an astronomical alignment of some sort with the supposed year of Jesus' birth for example.

But in general, you're absolutely correct and there is one thing you've mentioned that needs further clarification.

One should note that Jesus was executed by Crucifixion. This was a punishment that was only carried out on slaves, rebels, pirates and especially-despised enemies and criminals of the Roman Empire. It was not an execution method carried out on Jewish citizens. As Jesus was condemned by Jews (or so the Bible tells us), his death would have been that of stoning.
But as the Bible tells us that he was crucified, one can only assume that he was executed as an enemy of the Roman Empire. Not what the Bible tells us.
If this was the case, there would have been a record of the execution. The Romans were the documentors of their day - they would most certainly have recorded the crucifixion of Jesus. Not in just a single document, but in many. This plainly never occured - thus pointing to the fact that a Jesus as depicted in the Bible was never cruciified under Roman rule.

Mostly agree with this, except for the point about documentation of the Roman execution. The Romans executed people by the dozens weekly or daily. In fact, it is well attested that many of the highways were littered on both side with crucified bodies of criminals of all sorts. I doubt the Romans would have gone through the trouble of documenting the trial and crucifixion of many common criminals unless they were very significant individuals. But I suspect I am wrong. My reasoning is this - in times of great political and sociological upheaval, law and order is stretch to its limits and it is reasonable to assume that many of the victims of Roman "justice" might have gone unrecorded.

Mark you, my doubts about Roman documentary record of JC execution does not make his existence any more likely

I doubt the Romans would have gone through the trouble of documenting the trial and crucifixion of many common criminals unless they were very significant individuals.

That's the point, Huxley.
The Bible does not depict Christ as a "common criminal". He was a Jew who was condemned by other Jews and then executed by the Romans. If this was the case, he couldn't have been viewed as just a common criminal, but as an "Enemy of the Roman Empire". And if that was the case, there would most certainly have been documentation.
But as a common criminal, he wouldn't have been crucified anyway. He would probably have been thrown to the beasts, stoned by his accusors or hanged.

The Romans documented well the dealings of that time, and so did the Jews, the proof is there

does that include documentation of the virgin birth? there's room for doubt considering the inconsistencies of the gospels of matthew, mark, luke and john.