MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[Jackalope]

The difference is, that in the former case, we actually *have* contemporary sources, and in the latter, we do not. Has this escaped you? What precisely were Tactitus' contemporary sources? (Hint: they don't exist.)

How do you know who is contemporary and who isn't? Or are you just believing what someone told you? Ahhh, I see.

No really, I really want to know...how DO you know that George Washington was our first President? Were you there?? Ahhhhh yes yes...you have to believe what you were told, right?

Well, so did Tacitus.

Are you really this stupid?

Now you're begging the question.

Do we have a historical record of any other person besides Jesus of Nazareth who gained a following of believers called "Christian"? No, we don't.

You don't even have that (it is, in fact one of the questions we seek to answer here), and given that it's one element of what you're trying to prove, it's absolutely question begging to assert it here.

Keep the foolishness coming.

Indeed. It's entertaining.

But please, do continue as if your entire argument isn't fallacious.