>>24654292
ehrman's refutation was really weak ngl, but the point is pretty shit
there's plenty of books on hitler that have all the basic details right like date of birth time of death born in austria ect, that we would never the less consider complete horseshit because of other things the book says. If i were to copy some well established but basic biography and insert some bullshit about him being a wizard casting fireballs at russians in the middle, would ww2 historians be in the wrong for calling my book unreliable because "well you agree on MOST of the facts, we both say he was born in austria for example!"

Also, as bart says, the matter of jesus being god or not doesn't seem like a "minor" contradiction.