I call BS on Christianity

Rebuttal: Cons behavior was shameful last round. And on top of all that he has not provided any evidence for his accusations. Most debaters make statements and then provide links or evidence for that statement. The evidence Con provides sheds no clear light on his accusations and we are left wondering what it is he is claiming. Con says Christianity needs no proof but that is not what the New Testament says: 1 Peter 3:15, "15 Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you..." 2 Corinthians 13:5, "Examine yourselves...Test yourselves." Con has given us no reason why Christians reject common sense or physical nature. He has not shown that Christianity does not require proof. Or that Christianity does not need to test itself for the truth. Con mistakes that I offer apologies for Christianity, I am not an apologetic Christian. Con simply asserts that Christianity has short comings in evidence, scripture, and God, but provides no evidence for it. Con asserts that Bibles have been rewritten for apologetic purposes instead of language barriers. Con completely ignores when I said last round, many interpretations are reasonable from a Biblical standpoint. Con suggest the Word of God needs or has been corrected but then provides no evidence for it. Con over looks the need to change the language inside of Bibles so people would understand it. He also over looks that anyone could interpret the Word in their own way as suggested last round. Con shows no inerrancy in the Bible. Con makes the crazy claim that I must render all other Bibles invalid, yeah right. I only need to show the Bible I use as valid and I have done that. Con does not attack the valdality of the King James Bible. Con is more concerned about my sources(just ad hom attacks) than providing any real attack to my claims. Con says I need to explain why he should take my word that the Bible and Christianity are truthful. I do not need to do no such thing, do not all of us make our own choice, I need to give the readers a strong argument for Christianity and rebuttal Con. It is easy to rebuttal someone when they provide no real sourced argument. Con never mentions what it is I am dismissing. Historical Relevance: Con -"Pro lists a travel agency as a reference (?), and I have to ask, was this a joke?" "The city of Nazareth was a small and insignificant agricultural village in the time of Jesus. It had no trade routes, was of little economic importance and was never mentioned in the Old Testament or other ancient texts. Archaeological excavations indicate Nazareth was settled continuously from 900 – 600 BCE, with a break in settlement until 200 BCE, from which time it has been continuously inhabited." http://www.nazareth-israel.com... Last round I offered this evidence of ancient Nazareth after Con claimed it never existed. I did not know if he meant now or when Jesus was alive. We see this site which provides guided tours through Israel and Nazareth says that Nazareth was around before Christ. Therefore, Christ could have lived in Nazareth opposing Cons claim. But, we have more sites that provide the same conclusion: "Archaeological research has revealed that there was a funerary and cult center about two miles (3 km) from current Nazareth, dating back roughly 9000 years. Silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time." http://en.wikipedia.org... The New Testament is considered 99.5% pure. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls dating back to 200 B.C. for the Old Testament, to 68 A.D. for the New Testament, drastically reduces the time span in which the New Testament was written. The time span of the New Testament remains exceptional. http://www.youtube.com... http://www.faithfacts.org... http://evidencebible.com... Con clearly says he is here just to insult and that means he is not here to debate. Con is completely lost and he is on his heels as we can see. http://life.liegeman.org...... Confirms the validality of the New Testament. I have no idea why my opponents reuse of this link does not work but the one I used does. http://richardbauckham.co.uk...... Is a site of a author who has wrote on the New Testament. Con offers no reason why we should discredit him because he writes children books. He offered no reason why the author is wrong. Con makes accusations about this site..http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com......, he mentioned it looked cultic but gave us no examples. Con should explain this, "If your bible was just re-written and changed as you claim, then how is this preserving it? You have conceded this point, was this your intent?" I would like to know how rewriting scripture does not preserve it? How else would you preserve it when paper and ink, fade and deteriate. C2) Christian Teachings Con concedes Christian doctrine unless he address it. C3) Validly of Jesus Con continues to attack my sources and he fails. Sacredtext.com has sacred text from all over the ancient world and I cited it for the record of Josephus. He gives us no reason to deny the record of Josephus or that the site misquoted him. Con just does not understand the strength of Josephus' record, he is a well respected Historian. Josephus was a Jew and did not believe Jesus Christ was God but he wrote about Jesus showing that Jesus lived. He also remarked that Jesus had done many miraculous acts, this from a historian that does not recognize Jesus' divinity. I never suggested that Josephus claimed Jesus was divine in the first place. The Biblical authors have some of the highest integrity of any author in history and the records of the Bible still hold true unless shown otherwise. Con says that there was no other evidence of Jesus Christ well there is: Cornelius Tacitus; See Annals XV,44: "Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius." Suetonius: Roman historian and court official wrote in his Life of Claudius: "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." (Life of Claudius 25.4). Pliny the Younger: Recounts that he had been killing Christian men, women, and children. He is concerned that so many have chosen death over simply bowing down to a statue of the emperor or being made to "curse Christ, which a genuine Christian cannot be induced to do." (Epistles X, 96) Julius Africanus, who wrote around AD221. He quotes Tallus', "Tallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun'unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died." Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1 Conclusion I agree with Con, the resolution is affirmed until Con shows us otherwise. I have given you a Historical account of Jesus but Con complains about sources instead of the argument. He did not even offer us links that oppose Jesus as a person or the Divine. Last round and this round I have offered the validality of the Bible and all Con can do is complain that he does not believe it. Con did not address Christian doctrine at all. I send it back to Con.