Documents that purport to being factual accounts require some form of independent corroboration in order to verify their claims.
The gospels don't meet this criteria because they're part of the claim itself.
The various correspondence by church officials don't meet the criteria because their authors have a vested interest in spreading the religion... they can hardly be considered independent.
3rd party mentions (like Tacitus) merely state that certain people/events happened in a historical sense, but that doesn't lend support to the supernatural portion of the assertion.
It's amazing how this trips theists up. Demonstrating that an actual person named Jesus existed, and that he was a local religious leader who created a literal cult of personality, is a far different task than also proving he was magic. And, much to Steve's dismay, a litany of things pointing to mundane Jesus doesn't add weight to magic Jesus. That's not how logic works.
The gospels don't meet this criteria because they're part of the claim itself.
The various correspondence by church officials don't meet the criteria because their authors have a vested interest in spreading the religion... they can hardly be considered independent.
3rd party mentions (like Tacitus) merely state that certain people/events happened in a historical sense, but that doesn't lend support to the supernatural portion of the assertion.
It's amazing how this trips theists up. Demonstrating that an actual person named Jesus existed, and that he was a local religious leader who created a literal cult of personality, is a far different task than also proving he was magic. And, much to Steve's dismay, a litany of things pointing to mundane Jesus doesn't add weight to magic Jesus. That's not how logic works.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
