This book is so "out there" I am almost convinced it is a parody of the absolutely worst arguments used against the existence of a historical Jesus. Why?

Just have a sample:

• Peter Jennings was a "propagdanist" for Christianity.
• PBS is Christianity's "private broadcasting service".
• Annals 15.44 is a forgery, as are the entire Annals of Tacitus, despite what is said by dozens of classical and Tacitean scholars and textual critics.
• No copies of Tacitus date earlier than the 15th century. (Tacitean scholars like Mendell are apparently only imagining that there are copies from the 11th century.)
• You have to be an "imbecile" to accept any of the Annals as historical fact. So Ronald Syme was an imbecile, as are Mendell and all the rest.
• Organized religion is "the greatest danger to humanity in all of its history".
• Mohammed didn't exist either.
• The name "Jesus" is a fraudulent translation because it is a "Gentile name".
• The Catholics destroyed all but one Greek "version" of the Bible so they could give everyone the Latin Vulgate.
• Biblical scholars are just trying to preserve their careers.
• The Dead Sea Scrolls include in their contents references to several "messiahs" (who are executed and resurrected) as well as a "Last Supper".
• G. A. Wells is a "Biblical scholar".
• Notetaking didn't exist in NT times because there was no paper -- just papyrus and parchment.
• Circumstantial evidence is more reliable than eyewitness testimony.
• The Bible shows that John the Baptist was also a "savior of humanity".
• "Iscariot" is Judas Iscariot's last name.
• Acharya S is a reliable source.
• There is no evidence that the Romans used a cross shape to crucify people.
• Romans 16:22 shows that Tertius was the author of Romans.
• Christian missions to the hungry are bad because they enable people to spend money on drugs and alcohol they'd otherwise spend on food.
• The church should be sued for fraud under RICO.

Is this a parody?

I certainly hope so.

-JPH