Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
Not surpringly, things aren't as cut and dry as you'd have us believe. The sources you quotes are NOT generally accepted by both Christians and non-Christians.
|
That's not true.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
In fact, all of the sources quoted on your link fall into one of these categories; secondary source, debated source, a mention of Christ, not a confirmation of his existiance, or fiction.
|
Yes, exactly. You asked for secondary sources other than the Bible. I googled it and took one of the first pages that came up.
Ok, I think there may be a slight problem here:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
Thallus-The website’s reference to Thallus is incorrect (see Wikipedia).
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
Thallus’ reference to the supposed darkness is in the 9th Century. From Wikipedia:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
The Talmud- From Wikipedia
|
You can't just go to Wikipedia to get info. You have to consider there are people updating that information that may have no idea what they are talking about or not experts in their area. It's a nice general reference, but you may only be getting one side of the equation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
If these are the best sources you have, it’s hardly convincing. You expect me to accept the historical accuracy of Jesus based on these sources. Meanwhile, I could provide you with numerous peer reviewed scientific documents, and you’d find fault.
|
It's not mean to be convincing in itself. It has to be taken as a whole, along with the NT record of what happened. There is little to contradict it's findings. It's easier to talk about the truth of the NT than it is of the Greek Classics due to their age, preservation, etc.