(April 24, 2013 at 12:16 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Don't listen, Drippy. Way too long and complicated for your limited attention span. Stick to your silly bible. Its about all you can handle.
in 2000 years what absolute evidence will there be for anyone save a hand full of prominate world leaders?
I am sure this guy's arguement is based on the same idea that all who argue this arguement are bound to. He will have to attack the fact that the romans kept records, and from the secular pov the records kept, Christ is not mentioned in them... So rather than be truthful and say we do not have a complete record of that time. he will harp on the fact that of what we do have, anything that does mention Christ can be dismissed as 'religious nonsense' or he will continue to underline what great record keepers the romans were, but fail to mention 2/3's of what was projected to have been recorded has been lost to time, and what we have left are just incomplete one off fragments. (Meaning one of a kind not something that has been repeated or copied/no verification)
Not to mention I am sure he will omit the fact that the oldest most complete writting we have of that period is the bible. Rather he will have to focous on the pieced together fragments and projections one has avaiable to any of us 2000 years after the fact.
So again.. Meh..
