Yes AD 111....what you should be looking at is someone who is more accurate in the time period that Jesus lived in....Josephus...
Josephus on Jesus
In A.D. 93, the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus published his work Antiquities of the Jews. The extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently-recovered Arabic version, contain two passages about Jesus. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. If genuine, it is the earliest record of Jesus in Jewish sources, and as such is sometimes cited as independent evidence for the historical existence of Jesus. The other passage concerns James the brother of Jesus. Its authenticity is also disputed.
Greek version, from ninth century
The passage is repeated in three places in Antiquities of the Jews. One, at Book 18, Chapter 3, Item 3, in the translation of William Whiston, reads:
3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Our surviving sources for this passage are Greek manuscripts, the oldest of which dates from the 9th century. However there are citations in other writers of antiquity.
The first to cite this passage of Antiquities was Eusebius, writing in about A.D. 324, who quotes the passage in essentially the same form. Most scholars consider this strong evidence that this passage existed in manuscripts of the Antiquities of the Jews at that time, though skeptics have suggested that Eusebius himself might be the author of the passage [1] (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusMysteries/files/%22Eusebian%20Fabrication%20of%20the%20Testimonium%22)
Concerns about interpolations
However, it is significant that Origen, writing in about A.D. 240, fails to mention it, even though he does mention the less significant reference to Jesus, as brother of James, which occurs later in Antiquities of the Jews (book 20, ch. 9). Starting in the 17th century, this has given rise to the suggestion presented by Protestant philologists that the Testimonium Flavianum did not exist in the earliest copies, or did not exist in the present form.
Some modern historians reject the passage as an interpolation (i.e. forgery), on other grounds, for several reasons inherent in the text. In its context, passage 3.2 runs directly into passage 3.4, and thus the thread of continuity, of "sad calamities," is interrupted by this passage. The context, without the testimonium passage reads:
"...So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they boldly casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least: and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition. <insertion> About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder, and certain shameful practices happened about the temple of Isis that was at Rome..."
The passage 3.3 also fails a standard test for authenticity, in that it contains vocabulary not otherwise used by Josephus, according to the Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus, edited by K. H. Rengstorff, 2002. It is also argued that 'He was [the] Christ' can only be read as a profession of faith. If so, this could not be right, as Josephus was not a Christian; he characterized his patron Vespasian as the foretold Messiah.
The deepest concerns about the authenticity of the passage were succinctly expressed by John Dominic Crossan, in The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Peasant (1991): "The problem here is that Josephus' account is too good to be true, too confessional to be impartial, too Christian to be Jewish." Three passages stood out: "...if it be lawful to call him a man... He was [the] Christ... for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him." These seem directly to address Christological debates of the early 4th century. Consequently many secular historians dismiss the Testimonium as an interpolation.
Lastly it should be noted that the entire passage is also found in one manuscript of Josephus' earlier work, The Jewish War. Lower Criticism has shown this to be an interpolation as other manuscripts are extant that do not contain it including the modern standard text of The Jewish War
http://www.answers.com/topic/historicity-of-jesus
It's also interesting to note what the Quran, which has not changed like our christian documents, says about Jesus on this site...
Good Site.....also....
Chrestus was a common name in Rome, meaning 'the good.' This passage is not held by serious scholars to be in reference to a Jesus Christ, particularly as it states that the person in question was in Rome in 54 AD.