It is generally accepted among historians that only to facts about Jesus are almost certainly true: 1. That he was baptised by John the Baptist. (From the reliable source Josephus) 2. That he was executed on the orders of the Roman Pontius Pilate. No other information is from a reliable source, so we can only speculate. What do you think?
I wouldn't take it as fulfilling citation requirements either. Scientists don't use one study's points to support the very same study it's supporting, rather they bring up multiple independent studies before they come to a consensus. In short, this would violate the Circular Reasoning fallacy.
Which is why I've been coming to the conclusion that David probably didn't exist like it is painted in the Bible. (see post above)
That is quite surprising, were this verified, that King David/Solomon's existence is brought into question. One would think a classical era would keep tabs on the lifestyle of important people, sans spiritual texts. Even the enemies of King Solomon and David would have information on them, albeit not in the same light.
Exactly. I did a little more research last night and still came up with nothing but Biblical accounts.
