Theists: What makes your claims right and the claims of other theists wrong?

[Angrboda]

You implied that certain things were inconsistent with what the disciples claimed. If we have no writings of the disciples, we can't very well know what is or isn't consistent with what they claimed, can we? I'd think that pretty obvious.

... Using secondary sources is a perfectly good way of doing history. ...

It may be acceptable for historical research, but it is an imperfect way to discover the claims of primary sources. Since your argument concerned the claims of primary sources, your relying on the accounts of secondary sources is illegitimate and bad scholarship.

Since you were making a claim about what the primary sources say, referring to secondary sources is irrelevant.