Quote:Yeah, it may not be in your best interest for you to do a line for line...otherwise your intellect will get exposed for what it is...like how you think you are making such a magnificent point regarding the Great Hunger...when you fail to realize that for you to know anything about it, you would have had to either lived through it, or have spoken to someone that DID live through it...otherwise, you wouldn't know squat about it....which basically harmonizes with what I said about the Gospel narratives.
So what is this grand point you were attempting to make here??
My point is that your contention that people cannot write knowledgably about an historic period unless they've lived through it is idiotic. Well-researched historical writing has a long, well, history. If it didn't, there would BE no historical writing. If what you contend is true, then you cannot possibly know anything about the life of the figure known as Jesus of Nazareth, because you didn't walk round with him, didn't talk to him, didn't hold the bucket while he vommed up that wine he made at Cana.
You're exactly as close to establishing the reliability of the Gospel accounts as you are to demonstrating the historicity of Jesus: nil equals nil.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
