Originally Posted by AA5BY
It is amazing that people will base a bigotry on a dubious text of scripture. No scholar believes the writing of Matthew was done by an eye witness of any trial of Christ so words of the crowd could not be first hand so to base a bigotry on such a text is silly beyond comprehension. Scholars are also in general agreement that there was no sermon on the mount... so Matthew takes literary license as it were.... and likely did so again in those words.
if that is the case, then what else could be considered "literary license"?
if it's not true then how could one believe anything that is written in the Bible?