Don't keep dodging the question. Where is the Garden of Eden? It should still be there for all to see.
Genesis can be read in one of two ways - as history, or poetry. Either way you would not expect to see the Garden of Eden because
however you understand Genesis, the Garden was destroyed in the flood.
You call it shifting the goal post, because you can't even get pass the one yard line, as far as providing any credible anthropological evidence.
You and your so called historians have no credible anthropological evidence that Jesus, Moses, John the Baptist, The Garden of Eden-or any mythological person or place existed. Anyone you cite as a world class historian who says Jesus and any of the mythical characters or mythical places like the Garden of Eden existed--is relying on hearsay, gossip and scuttlebutt.
This is self contradicting. How could a historian be both world class and rely on gossip?
Try this summary:
Did Jesus Exist? Searching for Evidence Beyond the Bible - Biblical Archaeology Society
For your information, we know Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) existed, we know Queen Tye the grandmother of King Tut existed, we know Pharaoh after Pharaoh after Pharaoh etc...existed... because their physical bodies along with radio-carbon dated artifacts and writings found with their bodies, prove their existence as real people.
I suggest you take a trip to the British Museum in London or Egyptian Museum in Cairo, or I don't know say,...most major museums in America and around the world--and see primary, secondary, tertiary and radio-carbon dated anthropological findings that document the existence of people who "Lived Thousands of Years" before the mythical characters in the Bible and Tanakh of Judaism.
I actually laughed at this - I
was at the British Museum two summers ago. Guess what they were running. A "tour through the Museum with the Bible". So yeah, I have seen this for myself. So unless you want to say that they are a "so called Museum"...
And by the way, historians who actually lived during the time the mythical Jesus supposedly walked the earth, performing supernatural miracles in front of thousands of people--wrote absolutely nothing about him.
Especially, the events that supposedly occurred after the immediate death of Jesus--an earthquake, accompanied with darkness and dead saints rising up out of graves and walking into a holy city, (probably Jerusalem), where everyone saw them.
That surely would have been something to record by a historian of that present time.
FF Bruce said this:
There are in existence about 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in whole or in part. The best and most important of these go back to somewhere about AD 350, the two most important being the Codex Vaticanus, the chief treasure of the Vatican Library in Rome, and the well-known Codex Sinaiticus, which the British Government purchased from the Soviet Government for £100,000 on Christmas Day, 1933, and which is now the chief treasure of the British Museum. Two other important early MSS in this country are the Codex Alexandrinus, also in the British Museum, written in the fifth century, and the Codex Bezae:, in Cambridge University Library, written in the fifth or sixth century, and containing the Gospels and Acts in both Greek and Latin.
Perhaps we can appreciate how wealthy the New Testament is in manuscript attestation if we compare the textual material for other ancient historical works. For Caesar’s Gallic War (composed between 58 and 50 BC) there are several extant MSS, but only nine or ten are good, and the oldest is some 900 years later than Caesar’s day. Of the 142 books of the Roman History of Livy (59 BC-AD 17) only thirty five survive; these are known to us from not more than twenty MSS of any consequence, only one of which, and that containing fragments of Books iii-vi, is as old as the fourth century. Of the fourteen books of the Histories of Tacitus (c. AD 100) only four and a half survive; of the sixteen books of his Annals, ten survive in full and two in part. The text of these extant portions of has two great historical works depends entirely on two MSS, one of the ninth century and one of the eleventh. The extant MSS of his minor works (Dialogue dc Oratoribus, Agricola, Gcrmania) all descend from a codex of the tenth century. The History of Thucydides (c. 460-400 BC) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest belonging to c. AD 900, and a few papyrus scraps, belonging to about the beginning of the Christian era. The same is true of the History of Herodotus (c. 488-428 BC). Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest MSS of their works which are of any use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals. . . .
To sum up, we may quote the verdict of the late Sir Frederic Kenyon, a scholar whose authority to make pronouncements on ancient MSS was second to none:
‘The interval then between the data of original. composition and the earliest extant evidence become so small to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scripture have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.’
I assume that, for consistency, since you are that critical about Jesus you also dismiss Plato, Herodotus, etc?
Just because the Bible records miracles, does not invalidate it's authenticity. It doesn't invalidate the history. Whether the miracles happened is another issue - but to claim that Jesus did not exist, and to claim that historians who say otherwise are "your so called historians" doesn't negate the fact that Jesus existed.
