The Book of Abraham

[Sarpedon]

Having two sources mention the same event does not mean that one confirms the other. Seutonius and Acts both mention tumult in the jewish communities. What of it? It was a tumultuous time. Seutonius's brief and distorted mention of christianity doesn't have any significance. All it means is that christianity existed, which no one disputes. He does not give any mention of any of the apostles or miracles, nor does he give any indication that christianity was any different from the dozens of other cults that were common in the Empire in those days, and the only name he mentions, he gets wrong (Chrestus). I've read 'Lives of the Caesars' in its entirety, and the amount of space devoted to the supposed christians amounts to two clauses. Not exactly what you would expect to be written about people who are supposedly going about performing miracles.

Again, you are trying to masquerade normal historical accounts into support for your claims. A historian mentioning the existence of followers of Chrestus is not support for the notion that Paul travelled about the empire preaching, was arrested in Jerusalem and hauled back to rome for execution.

Your double standards are clearly on display here: you mock the mormons for trying to cover up the forgery of the book of Abraham, saying that the mundane papyrus has a 'deeper spiritual meaning that Smith could perceive,' yet you defend your own scriptures with vacuous remarks like 'In our study of the Bible we should not expect to find certainty.' Both are the same.