I do not think you understand what you are saying. Let me explain what you are trying to say.

Josephus mentions Jesus of Nazareth 3 times. Out of these 3, one is thought to have been an interpolation. This is what you refer to as a forgery. It is NOT considered to be a forgery, but an addition. Where Jesus' name appears to be written more respectfully. My guess, is that you got this idea from reading atheist activists' arguments. The arguments of atheist activists in this case is as important to me as arguments of apologists are to you. I care about real historians who have historical interest and not ideological! I am now talking about Josephus' account of John The Baptist. The account appears in ALL manuscripts of Josephus. It is considered to be authentic. John the Baptist did exist. So did Pilate. Please, check out the Pilate stone. It is an authentic gift Pilate sent to emperor Tiberius.

If there was no evidence of Pilate, you would have the argument. But using Occam's razor, the burden of proof is on you to show why you think that gospels account of Jesus' existence is ENTIRELY fictitious, despite them having historical accuracy, and why do you think that Tacitus, Josephus, Mara Ber Sapion, Pliny and Suetonius mentioning him are not sufficient.

This is the most evidence you can get about a 1st century Jewish Rabbi. Many of the works have been lost. I have not seen a compelling argument to show us why it is easier for us to conclude that everything is made up, then to conclude that there was a 1st century Rabbi by the name of Yeshua (Jesus), who was crucified by Pilate.

Many of these researchers are agnostic. And almost NONE of them is a biblical literalist. We have to be intellectually honest, regardless of whether we want to "trigger Christians" or not.

There are MANY things about Jesus and 1st century AD Christianity that are debated. Jesus' simple existence is NOT one of them!