Hello lil' port, hope all is well and welcome to the fray, EvC's an interesting forum - hope you enjoy your stay ..
I guess it happened if you take the Bible as literal and factual history.
Can one responsibly assign a bible in the role of an accurate historical treatise?
If so, which canon best meets the requirements necessary to make such designations?
Not everything in the past will be able to be found as evidence, because some things like cities were completely destroyed or something like that.
There also seems to be evidence certain narratives within variant bibles simply aren’t veracious, much less historic, hence the initial query.
In light of this, it appears not all stories relegated to the biblical past may be perceived evidently, and so, nor may evidence for them be found.
Or something like that ..
I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker. If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want anddesire mercy,not sacrifice' They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself? Think for yourself.