I've often made the point that Christians should be extremely careful picking their historiographical standard for evidence. Last night a "positive christian" explained that on the basis of where he has set his, he denies the historical reliability of the gospel accounts.

Imagine losing the right to defend the gospels as historically reliable accounts of the life of Christ in order to defend Hitler from what his inner circle wrote down.

I genuinely wonder how one could claim to have faith in Jesus Christ while simultaneously believing that the Gospels are unreliable. What is that faith based on? Vibes? Essays?

Probably some form of book of mormon knock-off doctrine where the only way you're expected to (dis)believe the accounts is a direct revelation from God.

Let the ministry of Jesus Christ of Nazareth be null n WORTHLESS before ALL BEING DONE IN CREATION TO STOP ELISE OYINKROMEINEIFA'S CERVIX FROM EFFACING TO 100% N DILATING TO A '10' STAND N BE OF EFFECT EVEN 0.1% ever in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth u900gtefsfbaiCnYH

So Woke Left and Right not only share the same political tactics, but also the same theological ones.

Nazis are demonic, satanic liars, children of their father, the devil. They do not worship the Lord God, but they worship satanic idols. These people honor the Lord with their lips, but their heart is always far away from Him. May the Lord have mercy on them all.

This reminds me of an interesting discussion I had with a Positive Christian a year ago. He claimed John 4:22 was a later addition, but when I asked to provide the manuscript evidence he had nothing. (He also hilariously argued that Jesus was Persian)

I think the key is at the very end where he says that “there were gospels that were not canonized.” If you’re (anti gospel accounts are historically reliable guy) trying to say that the gospel of Thomas is on the same pedestal of Matthew or Luke, you’ve lost the plot 😂

I have no clue exactly what he is saying. “We can’t prove it, we can also prove the facts are wrong in it, but I believe it by faith” Huh?

He seems to have this idea that "faith" definitionally is completely reasonless and blind faith.

the gospels are not considered historical by anyone. historicists dont even claim that, they simply argue jesus existed. Science shatters the stupid bible as a historical document in a million different ways.. pure jewish bs