(May 25, 2016 at 11:05 am)SteveII Wrote:(May 25, 2016 at 10:31 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: So........let me break that down:
You don't believe the NT because the NT says so, you believe what it says was true because of various parts of the NT?
You're not helping yourself here Stevie.
I should just stop this now, because this is more circular than my wife's rather lovely arse.....however, would you care to share the "other historical context (that*) are reliable?" please?
You really can't understand the difference between examining if a series of events happened and the 27 sources that describe these events? Answer the question I asked: then by that standard we could never believe anything that happened in the past on any subject?
I count one extremely biased source, the bible. What are the other 26? Tacitus is out, obvious forgery, so is Josephus. And everything else is at best third or fourth hand retellings of what somebody either heard or read from a few centuries later.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home