Not true. A historian name Josephus did in fact write one (two) sentence on Jesus, showing he probably did exist.
Those 2 sentences are in dispute; various scholars point out various inconsistencies in the phrasing and the inclusions. It is most commonly thought that later translators changed the wording of the sentences to turn them into references to jc
And AFAIK, not one of the 4 'writers' ever met him. Their names were given to the gospels but had ho part in the actual writing. I believe the earliest gospel was written over 100 years after the death of Jesus.
The Gospel of John differs markedly from the other three books both in tone and in some historical details. John does not follow the timeline in the other three and adds quite a few stories and details not found in them. For this reason, it's thought that John's gospel was not a child of Q, but a completely original work either by someone who knew Jesus directly or by one of his associates. The three letters of John found near the end of the New Testament are generally assumed to have been written by this same individual.
The identity of John has remained a mystery, although tradition has it that he is "the disciple that Jesus loved" mentioned in John 13:23. But here is a curious thing. In the entire gospel, John never mentions his own name (although he does mention other gospel writers). His …