New religion

[Carnavon]

Let us stick to what can be proven from reliable sources.

Fine - first thing we do is throw your fucking bible out the window. That is totally unreliable.

Tacitus was, as you say, a respected historian ( of the 2d century...not the first) but his work has come down to us in only two badly damaged manuscripts and both of those are copies of copies of copies made in the middle ages.

For such a respected historian it does seem odd that not a single xtian or pagan writer ever mentions Nero and the alleged persecution of xtians for the Great Fire in Rome.

http://carrington-arts.com/cliff/Nero.htm

The big question is why the Church Fathers know Nothing of this important information from Tacitus? The two partial manuscripts were found in the Medici library dating from 1313 to 1375. It is only after this time, much after, that the story became almost an Article of Faith about the early Church.

The closest we get to what Tacitus is alleged to have written is in the Chronica of Sulpicius Severus which dates from the early 5th century and which does not mention Tacitus as a source OR any of this Pilate the "procurator" bullshit.

If you want to go up against me in history you'd better do your homework.

Yes, one can speculate about various things but does not add to our knowledge. Credibility of sources is of great importance, hence my question why would you wish to throw the Bible out the window as the facts stated therein has not been disproved and for instance archaeology vindicates it trustworthiness rather than disproves it.

There are a great number of articles on this, one of which contains the following "Until recently, there was no contemporary evidence outside the Bible for Pilate's existence (although Tacitus, Josephus, and Philo all wrote about him). Then in 1961, Italian archaeologists excavating the theatre at Caesarea found this stone inscription of Pontius Pilate. Coins have also been found dating from Pilate's rule as governor." (http://www.facingthechallenge.org/pilate.php)
and also:
"The story has only just begun and there will be echoes from Eber for generations to come. It is at least thought-provoking that findings such as those at Ebla consistently support the Bible as a thoroughly acceptable record." (http://www.icr.org/article/ebla-its-impa...e-records/)
Thus, in essence what you offer is mere speculation whereas what I put forward for the reliability of the Bible is verifiable fact. Now if I was an independent observer, I know what I would believe.