(October 30, 2015 at 2:35 pm)robvalue Wrote: (Let me restate more properly: there is no good evidence that the gospels were written by eyewitnesses.)
1 we are not talking about the gospels...
2 lets turn to your video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhLUF1leMF0
2:20 "she was only refering to the gospels"
3 (we are talking about the writtings of Paul which are confirmed.
2:30 Mr. gerrbles admits "Scholars say john was there"
2:35 then Mr.gerbbles says "but their were no confirmed eyewitnesses." as if his word somehow trumpsa reasoned conclusion from an expert on the subject.
2:40 he start to stack the deck against the book of matthew...
Now if this were a real conversation why didn't the supposed lady keep pressing John? why? because Matthew is the easy target and mr. gerrbles wants to legitmize his position and can't unless he first establishes himself as a expert or some sort of authority, and defeating this magical 'strawwoman' is his way of doing that.
I couldn't watch any more of this propaganda, it is designed to feed on the weak among you and tickle your ears/tell you what you want to hear rather than be challenged by truth.
