jesus could not have existed, page-358

Director, I have given you a TU, for amusements sake.
Now, it really doesn't bother me at all whether you agree with bowral or not as point of the matter remains the same. It really depends on which side of the pitch your in, if you were to have carefully read all the threads between bowral and I, you may have gained a different hindsight but then again it all depends on which side of the pitch your in.

The verification of History as it stands, is subject to certain standards, sometimes it is applied and recognised and at other times it goes straight down the chute. So a valid premise must hold, whether a story contains a truth or not. Surprisingly, the Vatican admits to a point that the gospels are written in such a way as not to pass the test of truth of history. The Vatican are not as silly as what one could think, they are clever and have adapted themselves to clever answers for that mishap as they have in science matters.


The discussion will go on and on unless we attain and specify bit by bit what you are in disagreement with and both endeavour to tackle the discussion head on, clarifying point by point enabling us to determine what is- what isn't-what could and what may have been.

I shall later on read what you suggest. How is a lie or lies stated into what I have said?
Pin point them out and we could discuss point by point whether they are or not, applying methods that are satisfactory on both sides, so we can be fare with each other?

Have a great and prosperous day