It's been two days since I last posted as Percy, so beginning tomorrow I'll begin moderating this thread. I've become concerned that cryptic Socratic questions might have begun comprising too great a proportion of the contributions. As an occasional riposte, fine, but as a steady diet, no. If you have a point or a rebuttal to make then please state it directly and clearly.
Since I have never made such a claim and you still seem to misrunderstand what I have said, why should I respond?
You should respond in order to correct the misunderstanding. If you've decided this isn't possible then no response is necessary. You can click on the "Jar has not yet responded link" and it will change to "Jar acknowledges this reply".
In the writings of thousands of religious folk. Their writings seem to back up a lot of the statements in the Bible.
Some clarification might be helpful.
Did you mean to say that if, for example, someone writes that Jesus was born in Bethlehem after reading in the Bible that Jesus was born in Bethlehem that this would provide support for the Bible's account of Jesus's place of birth?
Or did you mean to say that there are many ancient writings that provide independent verification of statements in the Bible?