It's still not what I choose to believe.
Yes it is. Clearly.
It's the multiple lines of evidence that supports the existence of Socrates.
You choose to believe what you’ve copied and pasted. Bart Ehrman believes the non-Christian historical record that mentions Jesus. And I believe the non-Christian historical record that mentions Jesus.
I copied and pasted useful information relating to why Socrates most likely existed. You ignored all that was explained in the article, only to repeat your mantra 'you choose to believe'
It is the evidence that counts, not belief.
The funny thing is, you don't appear to accept multiple independent accounts relating to Socrates - Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle, Aristophanes and others.....yet try to invoke the words of Josephus, who didn't know Jesus, had never seen him, wrote about what he had heard, some of which was modified by Christian Scribes to suit their ends, as evidence for the existence of Jesus.
Can you see the absurdity and double standard of taking this line?
