Jesus the Christ is Probaby the Result of Creative Writing.

I'll keep my reply short and sweet, as much of my opponent's argument is off-topic, irrelevant, or advances MY case... >> "Let me start by explaining that there was never anything specifically written about Jesus during Jesus's lifetime that has been found. The key words being, 'that has been found'." This is NOT the familiar "Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack" argument. This admission by my opponent points out that there is evidence AGAINST Jesus' divine nature, yet there is no evidence FOR his divine nature. This point cannot be used to support his case, as it is an explicit appeal to ignorance paired with the admission that I have a salient point. >> "I hope I have explained how writing's from Jesus's time could plausibly, even probably, have disappeared." Not at all considering we have many, many documents from that time period, and as your own source notes, from even 3000 BCE. It's hard to imagine that only the documents involving Jesus' divinity were destroyed or lost... >> "Clearly, even creative writing has a basis in fact" Explain the basis in fact present in the book by L. Ron. Hubbard that sparked the Church of Scientology. The Bible is simply another book that sparked a following. >> "You make it sound ridiculous that God could have made man and not given him the talents we consider essential today." Incorrect - I point out that it IS ridiculous to hold that God would send a Son to Earth that could read in the temple, but not write on a scroll. THAT is ridiculous. >> "If Muslims (who are currently considered the more religiously devout of the two) are able to be proud of the tale that their prophet could not read or write, then why should Christians feel so differently?" Because the Christian God is supposed to be omnipotent and omniscient. If Jesus could not write, he was neither. Furthermore, Jesus could read, so it stands to reason that Jesus could write. It is difficult to imagine how one could be taught to read without being taught to write at the same time, or why any school would ever teach individuals one, but not the other skill. >> "Much of the Christian and Islamic and Jewish religion is very similar. We all have the Great Flood and the Ark, the Whale swallowing a Prophet, Adam and Eve, etc. Our prophets were similar too." This supposes that common trends are indicative of truth. It was common in Salem Massachusetts to accuse women of being witches and burn them, but that does not indicate they are true. Furthermore, the Great Flood has some actual basis in fact as being a localized flood in the Middle East as a result of the flooding of the Mediterranean basin if a seawall at Gibraltar broke. Stories of large fish and magical gardens are not the stuff of truth - they are the stuff of fairy tales and mythology. Nobody thinks Venus was really born in a seashell or that Dionysus is the true God of merriment and wine... >> "Philo may never have mentioned Jesus Chris in particular, but he did spend a lot of time on Logos, a Greek term for the word of God." Again - appeal to ignorance. Furthermore, Philo has a section in your source titled "First-Born Son of God." If he had anything at all to say about Jesus' divinity as it related to this "Logos-God," it would be in THAT section. And it is not. >> "He is also considered one of the forerunners for Christian beliefs. " That's interesting, considering he was a historian and your own source says he was a Hellenistic Jew. >> "Jesus's life is portrayed in the Old Testament..so what? I guess my opponent is trying to say there is no need for the New Testament?" No - you miss the point. The point is that the story was already laid out for them. The authors of the New Testament simply needed to insert a figure into preexisting verses to create the myth of Jesus the Christ from Jesus of Nazareth. >> "The oldest recorded information about Mary is believed to be in St Paul's letter to the Galatians, 4:4, written before any of the canonical Gospels. Here Jesus is stated to have been "born of woman"." implied virgin" Considering ALL humans are born of a woman, and no woman that bears a child can be a virgin, I utterly fail to see how that passage can possibly imply "virgin." ***************************************** My opponent has not responded to the following: 1) Jesus could presumably write, but did not. 2) At least one of Jesus Apostles could almost certainly write, but did not. 3) Middle-Eastern Mythology contains themes common to Jesus' life as outlined in the Bible. 4) Virtually all the details of Jesus' life pre-exist the writing of the gospels. 5) Some texts in the gospels are obviously mistranslated or incorrectly referring to the Old Testament. 6) Some events in the gospels are historically impossible, but coincide nicely with prophecy or creative intent. There are more pieces of evidence, but I feel that an actual rebuttal to the first round is necessary before we proceed. AFFIRMED.