Of course, but Kevmo has raised the issue of historically verifiable facts, and I pointed out there are differences between "historical fact" versus "scientific fact", versus "religious faith".
By standards of much of what we call "ancient history", the Bible generally and Gospels specifically are rather well attested to.
That doesn't make them "scientific facts", but it can provide comfort for people of faith that their beliefs are grounded in something solid.
Ultimately, beliefs in the super-natural are beyond any scientific or historical proofs, and greatly depend on our personal experiences to focus and make real...
By standards of much of what we call “ancient history”, the Bible generally and Gospels specifically are rather well attested to.
***because of the science behind such historicity.
By standards of much of what we call “ancient history”, the Bible generally and Gospels specifically are rather well attested to. That doesn’t make them “scientific facts”,
***but it does make them historical facts.
but it can provide comfort for people of faith that their beliefs are grounded in something solid.
***And those who deny historical facts have pushed themselves over the edge of irrationality in their desire to idealogically proselytize. One may as well debate with someone who denies Christopher Columbus sailed the Pacific Ocean in 1492.