He became a curse for us’ (Gal 3:13).    Maybe the reason for the paucity of Jewish evidence for Jesus has something to do with the success of the  ‘yimakh shemo ve zikhro’ curse (‘may his name and memory be obliterated’), rather than because Jesus was not as very well known in his own day?  Surely he must have been well known after all that happened in relations to him in both in Galillee and Jerusalem?  Perhaps there was indeed a very effective ban on talking or writing about Jesus that may even have constrained Josephus to the one tiny reference in his magnum opus.  Maybe that’s just wishful thinking?  However, we certanly know from Paul’s letters and from Acts that early Jewish Christians were persecuted by the Jewish religious authorities and Paul was hated so much by the more ardent Jews that they tried to lynch him and kill him.  This seems to be because they thought he was trying to do away with the the centre of of the Jewish religion – the law of Moses.  Arguably, he was!   Likewise, the highly respected brother of Jesus, James the Righteous one, was killed by the Jewish authorities, despite his almost universal respectedness. Both these events, suggest that Jesus must have been well known among the Jews of his time, so the paucity of writing about him in later Jewish sources and in Josephus is strange indeed.

All very informative, Robert thank you.  I sense that you are probably right about a there being nascent Christians ready to accept the resurrection story one it was broadcast to explain the early success of ‘resurrection Christainity’- perhaps the converts of the misssion of the 70 and others who actually heard Jesus preach.  And yes it was perhps more a perception among non-Christian jews and Jewish Christians that Paul was trying to destroy the law – they were really after his blood which is why he could never fullfill his desire to be the apostle to his own people but had to accept being the apostle to the gentlies – he made bloody good job of that role though 🙂