Perhaps are ignorant friend could try reading this, not only a gripping account of “Nero’s” accession, reign and downfall but includes a myriad of sources (contemporary) for that information.
Perhaps researching the flat statements one can get from apologetic websites would round this little fella’s education. As every post on every thread he encounters those capable of giving the lie to his flatulence.
Tacitus was 8 years old at the time Rome burned. Nero remained in power for another 4 years. Tacitus knew Nero to be the leader of Rome from age 8 to age 12. Gee, for me that would put me right in the middle of Surfing USA, The Beetles, The assassination of JFK, The cold-war with Cuba, Helter Skelter, Duck and cover drills in the school, and a hell of a lot more that I just don’t remember anymore.
I know I’ve pointed it out before. But the pattern continues. Tell someone there are no contemporary sources for Jesus and they will respond with the claim there are no contemporary sources for character X; and in every case so far, there have been contemporary sources for character X.
It is like there is an built in need to just make shit up in these people.
Reflexive Make Shit UP for Jesus Instinct - RMSUJI; well I guess the name needs work.
ETA: by my memory character X as been: Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great (more than once), Hannibal, and now Nero. Can anyone remember any others?
It is always irrelevant and irrational shit they make up at that, since no one is claiming the people they compare Jesus to were anything but human, making it a false equivalence fallacy.
Apologists this closed minded just will never understand that the fact there is only scant evidence Jesus existed at all is a problem for their claims he was the reason everything exists. Whereas if he did exist this in no way evidences he was anything but human. They simply don’t want to understand the burden of proof, or how far from it their religion’s claims are.
Since none of those historical figures are being claimed to have been anything but human, this is as you have been told repeatedly a false equivalence. There is some scant evidence that someone with a very common name for that epoch and culture, was executed in a very common way by the Roman authorities for political prisoners.
The rest is hearsay, second hand at best, unsupported by any objective evidence, not even one word was written by any contemporary.
You keep ignoring these facts, and rolling past them, but I will keep pointing them out, along with your dishonest evasion.
Like these questions and facts you are determined to ignore:
@Sheldon … indeed, the rank hypocrisy involved in attempting to dismiss summarily accounts written after the fact about real human beings whose previous existence is verifiable by multiple means, while handing out free passes to blind assertions from a Bronze Age mythology, is entirely typical behaviour among the more florid fundamentalists and Christian Nationalists.
All of whom routinely demonstrate that they consider the Ninth Commandment from their own mythology as discardable whenever it suits their apologetic convenience, and who regard lying for Republican Jeebus as not merely legitimate, but sone sort of perverse badge of honour.
