> Once again I want to make it clear I'm just an interested layman, not a historian and claim no expertise on all this. I am the same here (and not even a Chr

> Once again I want to make it clear I'm just an interested layman, not a historian and claim no expertise on all this. I am the same here (and not even a Christian, just a curious observer). I think you went overboard in your accusations here > I think the problem is you are picking and choosing what you think is true from a given text, and then offering up an explanation that you can neither prove nor falsify. I would have to be informed enough in the first place to be able to pick and choose. Seems I have stirred up a hornets nest. Given the situation, I have no further intention to participate in the thread. Regardless, > offering up an explanation that you can neither prove nor falsify this I will eagerly concede. I just did not realize my off-hand thinking aloud would be an object of such scrutiny. I should have known better.