>>18665449
They'll still cope and deny the Truth.

>>18665449
if theres a question mark in the article then you know it didnt happen.

>>18665449
It's not evidence in any way. It could have occurred on any single day in a 10-year period. Sure, theoretically it could be counted as evidence supporting the earthquake Gospel of Matthew mentions, but we have no presupposition to think that, especially since we have negative evidence for his other claims - such as Josephus not mentioning the temple's great tabard ripping apart, or any mention of the zombie apocalypse. Most scholars, including Christians, believe that Matthew was using narrative tools, and he's also the only one pf the gospels to even mention an earthquake. In other words, other Christian traditions are utterly unaware of the earthquake, especially Mark. Moreover, even if an earhquake did occur on the day Jesus died, it's not evidence of his resurrection. At most, it's simply a funny coincidence.

>>18665449
>a ten year margin of error
lol, yeah definitely happened on one specific day

Or maaaaaaaaybe the Gospels just included the earthquake that happened years back to make the story of the crucifixion sound more dramatic.