1) we don't really know what the original Apostles and disciples said about Jesus. We have some writings purporting to be from them but there is reasonable suspicion (in John's case a near certainty) that the disciples weren't the gospel authors.
All this is is an assumption contrary to the evidence. Who would assume that the N.T. authors were not the original Apostles and disciples?
If I had to guess, logic says Atheists and evolutionists. I would bet that Legend is one or both which explains the evidence denying assumption.
2) Assuming, for argument's sake, that the gospels were indeed written by the disciples, your position that they either lied or told the truth is a false dichotomy. They could have been honestly mistaken, deluded, deceived or a dozen other things in-between the absolutes of lie and truth.
Again, we have an assumption that the before and after nature of each Apostle, as conveyed in the textual evidence, and in other historical evidence, is false. The sources do not allow anything but a lie or truth option because the claims are so far fetched they are either true or a huge conspiratorial lie.
There is no evidence for the ad hoc options asserted by Legend.
3) We have no reason to believe that the disciples experienced "cataclysmic personal change for the better" other than their own -alleged- word.
All this is is an assumption that says the evidence is not evidence and that everyone lied (which Legend denied to be an option just above). The evidence in total shows cataclysmic change for each Apostle. This is why the only options are truth or conspiratorial lie. Since the N.T. is the most revered and time tested piece of literature ever written, whose authors are respected by hundreds of millions of persons, who testify to the truth written therein, and since 2000 years of scholarship has ratified the veracity of these scriptures, we can see these facts demonstrated by the "evidence" of Legend: assumptions and suppositions that the evidence is not evidence. Of course it almost goes without saying: assumptions and suppositions are not evidence, they are in these cases the word of Atheists and evolutionists, persons who have a vested interest and ulterior motive in seeing the Bible to appear false.
In short, said assumptions are a compliment, if there was any evidence they would not be needed.
Ray
Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.
Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
