[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I showed evidence above to prove you already wrong here, so how is it that you forgot about that?

You've actually shown no evidence at all. You made a statement (more than 5300 Greek manuscripts), but didn't even show where this statement comes from. In fact it comes from a Christian Apologist website http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm , and HE doesn't give any authoritative demonstration. So, where are these 5300+ manuscripts? The truth is, as I said, most of the extant manuscripts are copies of others; so how many original manuscripts actually exist? None. Everything we have is a copy, usually of another copy. So what manuscripts, even copies, are there really? A good start is here:
http://www.bibletranslation.ws/manu.html

As you can see, when we say "Manuscripts", we are not talking about whole copies of the New Testament, we are talking about a copy of one letter here, and a fragment of a Gospel there. None of the letters are records of the life of Jesus - they are all directives on how to live the proper Christian life. In fact, when the epistles refer to him at all they refer to the Lord, never the man. Likewise the Gospels: they tell the story - they never try to read like an actual biography.

More documents exist on him than any person in history, at an approximate rate of 100:1 over the second most, which is homer.

Again, you make a flat statement with no supporting evidence. The 'documents' are all religious in nature, and have no supporting historical record. And again you compare the Bible to Homer, whom we already agree is nothing more than a fabulous set of mythical stories. Are you saying the Bible is the same?

So what were we talking about then?

I was talking about what can be supported by historical records and what can't. You seem to be talking about proving a religious belief is true based on the number of people who believe it.