My Interaction with James Still over the alleged bias and reliability of the NT

The history of the exchanges goes like this...

I initially wrote "Does the 'bias' of the NT writers make it Unusable as evidence?" (4/6/96)...

James Still wrote a good response [LINK BROKEN/NO LONGER THERE]. to it.

He graciously notified me by email and we had a brief email exchange.

I began my analysis and response to his work, and am posting the first 8 out of 50 (appx) comments. (59k, 9/9/95)

The next 4 comments (9-12) are now ready. (43k, 9/20/95)

The next 4 comments (13-16) are now ready. (50k, 11/7/95)

I did a major revision to comments (13-16) (75k, 7/4/96) with emphasis on the Geography and strength of heresy in the early church.

Also added a new piece on Are some of the NT letters pseudonymous? (23k, 7/4/96)

The next 4 comments (17-20) are now ready. (92k, 8/28/96)

He has since added ANOTHER reply-to-my-replies [LINK BROKEN/NO LONGER THERE]. (which I obviously have not replied to!).

I resumed the discussion with Comment 21 (73kb, Jun 8,1998)

I added three long pieces on the Synoptic Problem (comment 22), Literary Dependence, and Gospel formation (each about 50k, June 22/98)

I resumed the discussion with Comments 23 and 24 on the alleged pseudonymity of the gospels (64kb, July 23/98)

I built an INDEX to the comments! 

The Christian ThinkTank...[] (Reference Abbreviations)