<snip>
From the article: The Resurrection: Fact or Fiction?
1. Roman History Scholar - Thomas Arnold -- Arnold wrote the three-volume History of Rome and held the chair of modern history and Oxford University. He was well acquainted with the value of evidence in establishing historical facts. This great scholar wrote:
"I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead."10.
<snip>
"Roman History Scholar"??!!??!!???
"Well acquainted with the value of evidence in establishing historical facts"???eleven??!!
Balderdash!
He was an ordained deacon, and a bigger apologist than even you.
Have you got a copy of this book?
Eminent Victorians by Lytton Strachey (Garden City Publishing, 1918)
I have. Let's read some of it together, shall we?
Page 207
Thus it was natural that when the twelve noblemen and gentlemen who had determined to be guided entirely by the merit of the candidates, found among the testimonials pouring in upon them a letter from Dr. Hawkins, the Provost of Oriel, predicting that if they elected Mr. Thomas Arnold he would "change the face of education all through the public schools of England, " they hesitated no longer: obviously, Mr. Thomas Arnold was their man. He was elected therefore; received, as was fitting, priest's orders; became, as was no less fitting, a Doctor of Divinity; and in August, 1828, took up the duties of his office.
Priest's Orders????? Doctor of Divinity?????
Well, sure, he's going to be really objective, isn't he?
Pages 209-210
He married young, and settled down in the country as a private tutor for youths preparing for the Universities. There he remained for ten years -happy, busy and sufficiently prosperous. Occupied chiefly with his pupils, he nevertheless devoted much of his energy to wider interests. He delivered a series of sermons in the parish church; and he began to write a History of Rome, in the hope, as he said, that its tone might be such "that the strictest of what is called the Evangelical party would not object to putting it into the hands of their children." His views on the religious and political condition of the country began to crystallise. He was alarmed by the "want of Christian principle in the literature of the day", looking forward anxiously to "the approach of a greater struggle between good and evil than the world has yet seen"; and, after a serious conversation with Dr. Whately, began to conceive the necessity of considerable alterations in the Church Establishment. All who knew him during these years were profoundly impressed by the earnestness of his religious convictions and feelings, which, as one observer said, "were ever bursting forth. "It was impossible to disregard his "deep consciousness of the invisible world" and "the peculiar feeling of love and adoration which he entertained towards our Lord Jesus Christ." "His manner of awed reverence when speaking of God or of the Scriptures" was particularly striking. "No one could know him even a little, " said another friend, "and not be struck by his absolute wrestling with evil, so that like St. Paul he seemed to be battling with the wicked one, and yet with a feeling of God's help on his side."
my bolding
Think he might have had an agenda running there, DOC?
I'll deal with your other pathetic Appeals to Authority in due course.
I win!
