The Atheists' argument of Non-availability of independent , secular historical evidences to prove the existance of Jesus is self-cheating for the following reason :
What is the chance of survival of any independant, secular historical references indicating the existance of Jesus.?
NIL. For 2 reasons of Atheists' own arguments :
- In a christian world where any such reference would have been treated as blasphemy and destroyed by 'intolerent' Chruch and the christian states.
- If that reference depicted Jesus as anything less than a God then that reference would have been 'modified' in such a way that Jesus would be referred as God. In effect such reference would join the league of christian references.
1. How, then, come the Atheists could expect any such secular, independant references to be available at present.? &
2. How the non-availability of such secular, independant references at present does prove the non-existance of Jesus.?
Any honest self-analysis forth coming..?
What is the chance of survival of any independant, secular historical references indicating the existance of Jesus.?
NIL. For 2 reasons of Atheists' own arguments :
- In a christian world where any such reference would have been treated as blasphemy and destroyed by 'intolerent' Chruch and the christian states.
- If that reference depicted Jesus as anything less than a God then that reference would have been 'modified' in such a way that Jesus would be referred as God. In effect such reference would join the league of christian references.
1. How, then, come the Atheists could expect any such secular, independant references to be available at present.? &
2. How the non-availability of such secular, independant references at present does prove the non-existance of Jesus.?
Any honest self-analysis forth coming..?