[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
bunny, you seem to be mixing up and misinterpreting the significance of the link I posted...the link is from an early 19th Century legal authority who is speaking in very old fashioned English about how the evidence of the 4 Gospels would be interpreted and considered in a court of law in his day...since he was a recognized authority on legal evidence and wrote a treatise on it maybe he knows a thing or two about evidence/testimony that the average layman would not know....He essentially is expressing his evaluation (legal opinion) of the testimony of the 4 Disciples who rendered the 4 Gospels....

I can't and won't do the work for all of you...I'm only indicating some sources to consider...Trying to help widen your lens...

[/ QUOTE ]
Well thanks for the patronising explanation of my error. I will point out that your original thread wasnt to do with evaluating evidence. It was about "an interesting agreement between Napoleon Bonaparte and Simon Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of Harvard Law School, on the nature of Jesus Christ..." I've asked you a number of times any such agreement would be interesting, to which you eventually replied that I should read the link. So I did. It didnt explain why it was interesting and I still dont understand why anyone would think it was.

I also made a criticism of one argument in the link you posted which you didnt bother responding to - shall I write to the author?

You dont really understand why I post on SMP - I'm all for a wide sampling of views. I do expect people to provide some explanation of why they think as they do. What they think is not particularly interesting, no matter who they are.

I wont bother you any more with difficult questions - it must be very frustrating to watch me mix up and misinterpret the significance of all the links you post. Not quite sure how that leads to your policy of not explaining any of them and, when questioned, of merely suggesting I read them. Still, it's for my own good, hey?