Modern examples of gullibility as evidence against Christian claims

[FallentoReason]

He's 1830 years closer to the fact.

And 140 years too late.

He had contemporary writings we do not have.

Any evidence for this claim?

Are there any opposing accounts of Jesus or his disciples?

What do you mean by 'opposing'?

http://www.greatcom.org/resources/aready...efault.htm
There are some. They are dated later, but that doesn't mean there wasn't an earlier copy. Remember, the first copy on Alexander the Great showed up 400 years after his death.

None of these are contemporaries as they all wrote after the alleged death of Jesus.

What leads you to believe he picked all his information from the OT?

At times his account is almost word for word from the OT. We're talking trivial parts, NOT prophecy.

He has Jesus destroy the Law that everyone keeps--why? And why have the Law-keepers kill the hero at the end?
The destruction of Jerusalem may not have happened until after Mark's Gospel was written (since most scholars believe Acts in 62AD was written first).

These are good questions that I'm still trying to understand myself. All I know is that he most likely wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem because so far all the allegories I have found are linked to parts of the OT which talk about punishment from God for the Jews' sins in the form of destruction. To me, the Gospel of Mark seems to be a reaction to the tragedy the Jews went through.