Dear DA,
lets face it - you are a religious zealot - its just that your religion is based on the belief that there is no God rather than the other way round.
You have been trying to convert others to to your beliefs - so you are activily evangelising for your faith.
Not only is your preaching arrogantly selfrighteous, but your arguments exhibit strong bias and inconsistent logic - which makes you a true hard core fundamentalist.
Compared to you the others are laid back, fairly balanced and reasonable, and their arguments are mostly realistic and consistant and they draw on a wide rang of sources rather than just rely on their religions texts.
You refuse to accept any source which does not say what you want it to say. You reject the Paul and Luke because they were written 30 or 60 years after the event, and Josephus who wrote another 20 year later, yet endorse the Quran which was written many centuries later by someone whose only source was the very thing you disparage - "the record essentially disappears for around 200-300 years until the story is merged with a substantial amount of 100% heathen nonsense...".
If Pliny, a historian and scholar with contacts in all the right places, is not trustworthy when writing about things which happened 80 years before (about 110 for Jesus birth) then why are you to be trusted to know what happened 16 to 18 centuries before your birth when you say "the record essentially dissappears for around 200-300 years".
Pliny was writing about events about as distant as WW1 is from us now - if in 2000 years someone came across a history book written now about WW1, would they reject it as evidence?
In one thing you are right - "The hyocrasy of religious zealots does know no bounds",
and fundamentalist Atheists are on top of the league.
