i don't care how many historians agree something is true, if there is no harder evidence of a thing, i do not hold it as granted .. pretty much everything in history is an inconclusive fog as far as I am concerned, except that we can say definitively that given technologies are known earliest at given points in history, and have many supporting stories that seem to tell a tale. when there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence for something, such as the being of a roman emperor of whom many statues were sculpted, paintings painted, records, bills, invoices, etc. etc., and they are all the same, and can all be dated to a certain very strict timeframe, then i think there is a good reason to believe that such a person existed...but as far as i know, the major portion of 'evidence' for the existance of "jesus the lamb of god" is roman birth record and crucifixion record of some dude named yehoshua... which is like 40 years off the bible timeline.
yeah ok.
| 
11-07-2013, 12:10 AM
Threaded Mode