(June 28, 2016 at 1:47 pm)SteveII Wrote:(June 28, 2016 at 12:57 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: They are evidence that they believed certain things, yes. They aren't evidence that they're beliefs are actually true.
So then the NT is a description of what contemporary people believed to be true with respects to Jesus' life and claims. Why would they believe it to be true if in fact it was not? Many would be eyewitnesses or had access to eyewitnesses.
Conversely, we have eyewitnesses that don't believe. Like these two dweebs:
Luke 2:41-52
41 And His parents used to go to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover.
42 And when He became twelve, they went up {there} according to the custom of the Feast;
43 and as they were returning, after spending the full number of days, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. And His parents were unaware of it,
44 but supposed Him to be in the caravan, and went a day's journey; and they {began} looking for Him among their relatives and acquaintances.
45 And when they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem, looking for Him.
46 And it came about that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them, and asking them questions.
47 And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers.
48 And when they saw Him, they were astonished; and His mother said to Him, "Son, why have You treated us this way? Behold, your father and I have been anxiously looking for you."
And He said to them, "Why is it that you were looking for me? Did you not know that I had to be [en tois tou Patros] in My father's {house?"}
50 And they did not understand the statement which He had made to them.
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.