Johnny Skeptic

If so, I would like to know how. If not, why should the New Testament be accepted without sufficient external corroboration?

Ray Moscow

Well, some religions do well without an ancient book (e.g., Scientology), but I think it would be hard for a religion like Christianity, which is supposedly based on events in the past, to exist without a Bible.

Bushman

There hasn’t be a good case made for Christianity period, with or without mention of Biblical scriptures.

Spanky

Johnny,

Somehow I have a feeling you already know all of the answers to your questions!

Johnny Skeptic

Well sure, but what is wrong with asking the question that I asked? Asking questions is a good way to start discussions.

Spanky

Nothing is wrong with asking the question, of course. I just feel you already know the answer, as do I.
This is why I am very, very agnostic when it comes to the existence of Jesus. The only place we truly find him placed in history is in the gospels and sometimes in the epistles. If he was historical, he was not the type of person we see in the 4 gospels! Otherwise, there would have been innumerable "outside" accounts of his miracles, deeds, crucifixion, etc. Remember, his "fame spread throughout the land." It obviously did not spread throughout the land! The furthest it spread seemed to be to about 20 people! So really, how can there be a case made for Christianity or even its supposed founder? Everything we see in the gospels, the miracles, the notation of what Jesus said and did in the absence of people, etc. is fable, myth, and allegory. So how we can find history in an outright myth is beyond me!