Amazing resources from Wikipedia.

[Minimalist]

[Fake Messiah]

With, some samples to discuss!  First,

According to some, Mark's geography was not always accurate, for example Mark 7:31, describing Jesus going from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee by way of Sidon (20 miles farther north and on the Mediterranean coast). The author of Mark did not seem to know that one would not go through Sidon to go from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee, and there was no road from Sidon to the Sea of Galilee in the 1st century, only one from Tyre.[81][82] Catholic scholars have interpreted this passage as non-problematic since Jesus would have traveled in a wide circle, first north, then east and south.[83]

Or when Mark has Jesus disembarking on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, in what he describes as "the country of the Gerasenes," but this is Gerasa was more than 30 miles from the shore.

Not to mention that "Mark" invented Sea of Galilee. No one ever referred to this small river-fed lake, just 7 miles long and 4 miles wide, as a "sea" before Mark did. Even Luke consistently "corrected" Mark, calling it by its real name and proper term: Lake Chinnereth.

[Godscreated]

With, some samples to discuss!  First,

According to some, Mark's geography was not always accurate, for example Mark 7:31, describing Jesus going from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee by way of Sidon (20 miles farther north and on the Mediterranean coast). The author of Mark did not seem to know that one would not go through Sidon to go from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee, and there was no road from Sidon to the Sea of Galilee in the 1st century, only one from Tyre.[81][82] Catholic scholars have interpreted this passage as non-problematic since Jesus would have traveled in a wide circle, first north, then east and south.[83]

Mark 7:31 Then He returned from the region of Tyre and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, in the region of Decapolis. This verse says He was in the region of Tyre which could have easily put Him near Sidon which is only 30 miles from Tyre, he could have been closer and probably was since He traveled back to Sidon which He previously left to go to the region of Tyre as explained in Mark 7:24. The region of Decapolis is on the south east side of the Sea of Galilee and it would make sense for Jesus to travel toward Damascus and pick up the main road into Decapolis. Much less mountain terrian. You are assuming that we know all the little roads that were used in those days, many are lost forever to us and besides it would seem unlikely there would not be a road from Sidon to Damascus. A road from Sidon to the Sea of Galilee was not needed since Tyre set only 30 mile away but this road would have taken Jesus to the north western side of the Sea of Galilee and His intended destination was the southeastern side of the sea. Like I said there was a major road to Decapolis from the region of Damascus.

 
And, Luke:

In Acts 21:38, a Roman asks Paul if he was 'the Egyptian' who led a band of 'sicarii' (literally: 'dagger-men') into the desert. In both The Jewish Wars[98] and Antiquities of the Jews,[99] Josephus talks about Jewish nationalist rebels called sicarii directly prior to talking about The Egyptian leading some followers to the Mount of Olives. Richard Pervo believes that this demonstrates that Luke used Josephus as a source and mistakenly thought that the sicarii were followers of The Egyptian.[100][101]

This proves nothing, it's speculation at best. The sicarii were Assyrians, that is according to the Roman who asked Paul the question.

GC

Moderator Notice
Edited to fix quote

[Jehanne]

Keep bending and twisting, GC.  Virtually all Biblical and classical scholars, even believers, believe that the Bible is not without error.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And his control freak god wouldn't let him into the promised land because he smote a rock instead of waving over it. Seriously, God has some issues.

[Little lunch]

I’m just guessing, but you wouldn’t believe my motorcycle trips either, by this reasoning (or work trips for that matter).

This seems like a minor and meaningless quibble, which is easily explained.

Compared to a major quibble like Samson killing a thousand men with the jawbone of a donkey and then losing his strength when his hair was cut off, which is impossible to explain.

[RoadRunner79]

I’m just guessing, but you wouldn’t believe my motorcycle trips either, by this reasoning (or work trips for that matter).

This seems like a minor and meaningless quibble, which is easily explained.

Compared to a major quibble like Samson killing a thousand men with the jawbone of a donkey and then losing his strength when his hair was cut off, which is impossible to explain.

That would be a better argument from incredulity yes.

Much better than the argument of "cannot get there from here"  or the argument from "one can only walk in straight lines"

It's still fallacious, and yet a big step up.  Congrats!

[Jehanne]

Compared to a major quibble like Samson killing a thousand men with the jawbone of a donkey and then losing his strength when his hair was cut off, which is impossible to explain.

That would be a better argument from incredulity yes.

Much better than the argument of "cannot get there from here"  or the argument from "one can only walk in straight lines"

It's still fallacious, and yet a big step up.  Congrats!

In 1st century Palestine, there were Roman roads and people did use them. It's like someone saying that they sailed to Europe from the United States by going to the West.

[Minimalist]

And his control freak god wouldn't let him into the promised land because he smote a rock instead of waving over it. Seriously, God has some issues.

God's a dick.

[RoadRunner79]

That would be a better argument from incredulity yes.

Much better than the argument of "cannot get there from here"  or the argument from "one can only walk in straight lines"

It's still fallacious, and yet a big step up.  Congrats!

In 1st century Palestine, there were Roman roads and people did use them. It's like someone saying that they sailed to Europe from the United States by going to the West.

And what are your assumptions here? Are you saying you cannot get there from here?