Any repetition of my position has been to correct wilful misinterpretation of it. The substance itself has always remained the same.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Well, you have taught me how to use dictionaries: Synonyms can always be used interchangeably without regard for context or category.

According do thesaurus.com, substance is synonymous with animal. It also tells me animal is synonymous with thing, which is synonymous with affair which is synonymous with fornication.

Please stop bragging about your sexual encounters.

From what I recall, I never cited links to thesauri. The links were to dictionary entries, stating that a secondary definition of polemic is 'an argument'. No inference or special "way of reading" is required for the equation. I'm not going to repost it, because Original_Position has asked us to stop derailing threads with semantic debates.

Sexual encounters? Lol...you have a vivid imagination.

You have firmly established in dozens of posts that your memory is untrustworthy.

Case in point: You've based your entire argument in this thread on taking a singular sentence and claiming it means something completely different, and you've spent the rest of the time insulting the ones who object and the intelligence of anyone unlucky enough to read the ensuing debate.

I'll let this be my last post to you in a good while and end it with two simple points: If you're a troll, you lack wit. If you're not, you're mediocre.

This is a bare assertion, which is false. Instead of addressing the substance of your opponent's position, you've decided to deflect with a fabrication. Most unfortunate. Thank you for, once again, ignoring the fact that you denied a plain dictionary definition of a word to avoid admission of error.

Also false; correcting wilful misinterpretations of a cogent and perspicuous statement is a far cry from changing one's argument. When my position is misrepresented, I will correct the error by pointing out the interpreter's shortcomings. In your case, those shortcomings are wilful, designed to avoid admitting the refutation of your counterpoints.

I'm not sure exactly which insults of mine you're referring to- it's getting hard to keep track of all of your fictions and platitudes. If you're referencing my chastisement of you and Aaron W. for engaging in captious argumentation, and then refusing to admit defeat by falsely accusing your interlocutor of engaging in such argumentation, then you deserve every bit of the reprobation I've brought against you. When you act like a child, you'll be treated as one.

In short, you have absolutely no argument here.

You can keep telling yourself that if it makes you sleep well at night. I could post a laundry list of your greatest hits over the past 3 weeks or so, demonstrating a pattern of constant positional shifting and unreasonable interpretation to avoid admission of error, but I think I'll save my breath for the time being. Every argument you've thrown at me has been soundly quashed, and now you wish to paint me as "lacking wit" and "mediocre". Supremely amusing. These are the cries of an inferiority complex in abject distress over encountering an opponent with zero tolerance for bull****. If I give you an inch, it would be an assault against the integrity of reason.

Feel free to reengage at any time, but spare me your trite defense mechanisms, k?

You are trying way too hard.

It's called "winning."

Now you're talking .

There is no try, my young padawan. I'm responding with basic logic. Tame_deuces has fabricated claims of "untrustworthy memory" against me to avoid admitting his errors, yet cannot provide a single example of these claims, despite stating that I have "firmly established it in dozens of posts". Dozens. A standard dozen is a set of 12, and the plural implies a minimum of 24. Tame_deuces is claiming that there are at least 24 posts of mine where I have "firmly established" that I have an "untrustworthy memory"...yet can't provide a single example. Marvelous.

This is the kind of opponent I dream of: one who erects straw man after straw man, hoping against hope that they will not be toppled at the slightest breeze.

there are numerous proofs. No need to tell.

Yes...the numerosity of these proofs overfloweth...

Yes, there is indeed evidence for a historical Jesus. It is important to note that Jesus's divinity is a different question than his historical existence. People sometimes conflate the two.

Evidence for a historical Jesus:

Jesus is mentioned by paul 10-20 years after he died. Paul was alive at the time of Jesus and was friends with some people who personally knew him. It is even possible that paul may have met Jesus before he was crucified, this view is argued by Dr Licona although I do not think it is likely that he did, he still knew people that knew him personally and mentions some of his earthly activities.

Jesus was buried, crucified, his last supper and betrayal by an apostle etc.. Almost every scholar agrees on at least 7 of pauls letters being authentic.

Mark is probably the oldes biography we have about jesus written somewhere around 70 ad . It is important to note that biographies during this time were much different than biographies we see today. The details of the story took less significance than the story itself. A smooth flowing narrative based on facts was more important than getting every detail correct. This imo, accounts for most (not all) of the differences in the four gospel accounts.

Luke and matthew come about a decade later and use mark as a source. On top of using mark they seem to use another source because many of the events are the same in both gospels, yet not mentioned in mark. This additional source has been referred to as Q, and is thought to be saying and deeds of Jesus.

John is written maybe a decade after luke/matthew and includes an older oral tradition passed down from generations.

Josephus, he mentions Jesus, jesus's brother and the excution of his brother James. Some of his writtings are thought to be later corrupted by Christians but it is universally agreed by all schoalrs that at least some of these passages mentioning Jesus and his brother are authentic.

That is 5 sources in the first century

1) Paul
2) Mark
3) Q
4) John
5) Josphus

Other things to consider, Jesus was baptised by john the baptist, betrayed by Judas, crucified, and was from Nazareth, the messiah was supposed to be born in bethelham. These paint Jesus in a bad light. It would have been easier to not include these parts of the stories yet, every gospel mentions them. If he was completely made up it would have been easier to either change the oral story about Jesus or simply not include these details.

This is very good evidence he exists. We don't generally have this much evidence for figures in antiquity. Especially people who were sentanced to death, and at the time would have not been viewed as important aside from a few who thought he was important.

I don't think it is barely correlated. If there is good evidence Jesus existed, then is it more or less likely that supernatural attributes assigned to him by people who claimed to have known him are true than if there was no good evidence he existed?

It's pretty clear for any supernatural claims to be concluded as true or false, he would first have to be proven to have existed in the first place correct?

Furthermore, if he did exist, and miracles associated to him such as the resurrection are concluded as possible, then is it more or less likely that the claims he and others made about his divinity or association with divinity are also true?

I can't see a way you could argue with this, unless of course you reject divinity, miracles, and all that a priori, which would really render all discussions such as this moot.

There are a lot more than 5 1st century sources:
http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014...ide-the-bible/

There are at least 5 sources in the first century.For example, some scholars think the gospel of thomas is a 1st century gospel. Also, it is most probable the mark is based on several sources for a variety of reason. Mostly because of the change in pace during the passion narrative.

However, The link you provided only has 1 additional source from the first century Mara Bar Serapion. It is unknown if he was talking about jesus and largely in dispute.

There are some studies that may prove that Jesus exists as a person, but of course, this doesn't mean that he is the son of Good or anything like that.

I think that the whole story (Bible) should have some things that are true, so it's probably true that there was a guy called Jesus living in Jerusalem and maybe even the half of the stories are based on things close to the reality... But of course, this is just another theory

If Jesus didn't exist (possible) would that make "his" message of love, peace and forgiveness meaningless; or does the message exist for us in the present independent of specific historical facts?

Thus says The Lord:

The proof of My Existence and that of God the Father will be revealed in all its heavenly glory to every man, woman and child.

My Presence will be revealed in a way that no one will nor can ignore. For the Heavens will open, the stars will collide so that My return to save you will be felt in every corner of the world at the same time.

Oh how My children will rejoice when they bear witness to My Divine Presence. Even those in darkness will feel My Love touch their cold souls, which will ignite them again.

Prepare. Await My Glorious return. Pray for those who have fear in their hearts. Do not fear Me. Await this Great Event with love and humility in your hearts.

I Love you, children. This great Act of My Mercy will prove this to you.

Your beloved Saviour
Jesus Christ, King of Mankind

https://fatherofloveandmercy.wordpre...-of-the-world/

but isnt still any form of evidence that can be foun debatable? not refering to the bible or other affiliated proofs, but from third party persons and can it be related directly to the bibles jesus?

I totally didn't realize that Jesus has his own blog!

Jesus is Lord of Lords and King of Kings and has prophets in all ages and in all nations. Its a big shame upon the inhabitants on this planet who walks prideful around in the path to hell fire ignorant of the fact that God has walked the earth and showed the way for us.

Thus says The Lord:

For only one proof stands forever, lasting from generation to generation,
The Word of God, The Bright and Shining Sign Post!...

http://trumpetcallofgodonline.com/in..._Must_Be_Saved