Total realism, I never claimed to base my beliefs on evidence. To do so and to think others do is, well, moronic. A belief is something that is not bound by evidence. You appear to neither have the manners to ask nor the wit to infer that I am Agnostic

I am happy to critique the body of "evidence" - perhaps have a discussion on the canonical process, the politics that went on and so forth and the reasons that these decisions were made to fit the needs of the geopolitical reality and hence the hangover of these vestiges to today.

Quote Originally Posted by Fragony View Post
There is no evidence that parts of the NT were Roman propaganda, some historians suspect it.
There is precious evidence for most of it. Interpreting any text that has gone so many edits to the point where large parts of the original texts are only known from senior church officials at the time declaring them heretical is nonsensical. Of course, discussing the reasons for the creation of the versions that were created it itself has value.