Jesus existed, and was the son of God.

"Uh, yeah, I saw the same thing too! I saw Jesus!"I was implying that people could very well be likely to say they saw Jesus when in fact they didn't to get fame and followers. I did not understand your following "more like" sentence and the explanation. The people who wrote the gospels preached around the time and place of Jesus. If what they said didn't match up, they wouldn't have lasted long.Pro, you are missing the point. I'm saying the stories could have been passed on and that doesn't conclude the authenticity of its contents. What you're saying is if the stories didn't match up they wouldn't have been passed on. Have you read my evidence to support this claim? You stated it yourself. "The Gospel according to Mark - Written by John Mark, the earliest of the gospels. Thought to have been an interpreter of Peter - Cousin of Barnabas, who travelled with Paul on some of his journeys," and "The Gospel according to Matthew - Commonly thought to have been written by Matthew, a tax collector, who later became a diciple of Jesus. Though scholars say that it may also have been based off Mark's Gospel."-Pro, Round 2. Nonetheless, it has been made a fair point that everyone writing the same thing doesn't make it true. As the Star Wars and Twilight examples have shown. A most concrete evidence is when it comes to magic, which brings us to the next point. Do you believe he has magical powers? "I don't like to use the term "magic" because that has connotations of witchcraft and wizzardry. Which is the power of evil spirits." Okay, so you do believe in magic then. You do believe witchcraft and wizzardry then. Is it taught in the gospels? Do you believe in Jesus walking on water? Some kind of potion that feeds 5000 men? Followers moving mountains? Resurrection after death? Just give a simple answer, please."God is the sustainer of the world, and Jesus is God, so everything that happens in science, God makes happen, so he could easily make science not do something instead."Ah, how nice. Science is based on questioning and critical thinking and disproving hypostheses with evidence and such until you get a theory (English-fact, science-theory) with countless independent evidence pointing in the same direction. No evidence for God's existence, however. Based on your quote, is God causing His own demise then? Parts of gospels that were from eye-witness accounts.In 1901, William Wrede challenged the historical reliability of the gospel, concluding especially that Mark portrays Jesus as secretive about his messianic identity because the historical Jesus had never claimed to be the Messiah.Form criticism later revealed that the narrative comprises fragments put in order by Mark, or by someone before him. New Testament scholar Graham Stanton states that "the gospels are now widely considered to be a sub-set of the broad ancient literary genre of biographies."Charles H. Talbert agrees that the gospels should be grouped with the Graeco-Roman biographies, but adds that such biographies included an element of mythology, and that the synoptic gospels also included elements of mythology. E.P. Sanders states that “these Gospels were written with the intention of glorifying Jesus and are not strictly biographical in nature.” Ingrid Maisch and Anton Vögtle writing for Karl Rahner in his encyclopedia of theological terms indicate that the gospels were written primarily as theological, not historical items.Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis notes that "we must conclude, then, that the genre of the Gospel is not that of pure 'history'; but neither is it that of myth, fairy tale, or legend. In fact, 'gospel' constitutes a genre all its own, a surprising novelty in the literature of the ancient world."https://en.wikipedia.org...Refutal to The website is to prove the accuracy of the gospels. Which has been attacked adequately to disprove. I shall not attempt to refute the refutals Pro has given for the website.In Round 2, Pro seems to have been desperately trying to prove the accuracy of the gospels. I guess those stories and the Testaments are the only evidence to support Jesus being God, which are unsurprisigly Christian. Of course, the only people who are going to help you promote your business is your company itself. That's the gospels and Jesus, alright. You can write books exaggerating your products, you can have commercials featuring eye-witnesses (whether staged or not) but it all goes back to you promoting yourself. If not, you would simply disappear and go out of business.So far, the points in Round 2 that are not even touched by Pro in Round 3:-Just because there are many gospels saying the same thing doesn't mean it must be true as much as many fanfictions about Twilight doesn't mean vampires exist.-Peter, who travelled with Paul, could have received the stories from him, and Matthew's gospel could have been based off Mark's. And they could have passed the stories on too. And there you have it, many storybooks with the same stories.-Because of this particular motive of providing evidence, gospels could have been written. The dawn of Christ could have required more evidence, and the followers of Christ may have come up with their books that reflect one another just so you can now say that the numerous gospels are all about the same thing.-reasons for forgery have been stated above.-(A forgery on this scale would be too hard to complete) Not that hard, considering religious texts of other religions are easily spread as well.-Any fictious concept could have had numerous independent stories, other than the Twilight fanfiction mentioned above, there could be retellings of Terminator, The Matrix, and other concepts that mix and match that essentially still retain the core idea, just like the gospels could have been the fanfiction, Jesus the idea.My personal favourite: Pro- "Peter and John, the disciples, 'would have been absolutely sure about these details, and they are recorded as the same, even by different people. So they must have been convinced themselves.'"This point has been rebutted above. "They must have convinced themselves" demonstrates they didn't even know the creditibility of those claims but they decided to roll with it anyway. Just like how they "filled 5000 men with just 5 loaves and 2 fish."This is one good debate, mate. Best of luck for the next round.Avicii is a producer, Coldplay is a band, they make awesome music.