Convert me to Christianity

Also I would like to reassure him that we have a number of fine debaters from all manner of age groups and demographics. Argument from Paul. My opponent asks that "What made Paul convert? Could it have been a dream? Could Paul have been mistaken? I highly doubt it considering Paul's strict beliefs. I highly doubt if my opponent had a dream that Jesus came to him and told him to be Christian that he would do it. " My opponent is implying that Paul had a religious experience so intense that it altered his core beliefs, and that such an experience being so intense must surely have been a genuine example of divine revelation. Indeed Paul was a zealous Pharisee who persecuted Christianity, and who apparently enjoyed a complete 'u-turn' in his beliefs after having a vision of Christ on the road to Damascus, which incidentally left him blind for three days. However, we know that it is possible to experience clear and vivid auditory and visual hallucination. We also know that there is such a thing as psychotic blindness, in which extreme stress can render someone blind for a temporary period. We do not know what psychological stresses Paul was under, he may have been suffering a nervous breakdown, he may have been suffering guilt as a result of his persecutions, he may have not been drinking sufficient water under the hot desert conditions, his mind may have been swimming with the rhetoric of the many deviant Jewish political and religious preachers of the time. When one hears the voices of the dead, it is usual to first assume that it is insanity, there is no evidence to lead us away from this first conclusion. The Disciples My opponent states, "I would also like to point to the disciples. Here were 13 men (including Matthias and Judas Iscariot) that gave up their lives to follow this one man. What made these men die cruel deaths for this one man after Jesus had left them? How could this man be so convicting that they gave their lives for him? In Matthew 4: 21, Jesus came by James, John, and their Father Zebedee. They left their own father behind to follow Jesus. Why would these men do that? " It is clear that Jesus lived in an age of great despair, political and religious despair. Heretical preachers and their devoted followers were not uncommon. Throughout history people have followed leaders with fanaticism, the strength of their loyalty does not prove the quality of the leader. Hitler had the fanatical support of many, indeed Goebbels was so loyal that he took the lives of his six daughters, his wife and himself. It is far more likely that Jesus was simply very charismatic, not that he was divine. The Miracles "The Bible says that the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being a demon or a minion of Satan of some sorts. Jesus refudiates this by saying ". .. Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. " Matthew 12:25. In other words, the Pharisees could not deny that Jesus walked on water or raised the dead because everyone had seen him do it! Instead, they had to attack Him by saying that he was a minion of Satan. " In actual fact I believe that this is concrete evidence against the divinity of Christ, a number of miracles are attributed to Jesus. The creation of animal golems, the feeding of the five thousand, the resurrection of Lazarus etc etc. If such miracles were true, and so widely witnessed the Jewish establishment would have converted to Jesus. The Romans would have converted to Jesus. A man of such obvious power would not have been crucified as a common criminal and heretic. The only logical conclusion is that Jesus did not present sufficient evidence of his divinity in his life, this directly contradicts and invalidates the biblical account. The Argument from Luke My opponent simply suggests that Luke looked into Christianity and liked what he saw, this can not obviously be seen as proof of Christ's divinity. The Argument from Constantine It is is interesting that my opponent cites the conversion of Constantine, because the historical record of that shows a number of discrepancies. It is not known when exactly Constantine converted to Christianity, his mother was a Christian and he did not take part (but also did nothing to prevent) Diocletian's persecution of Christians. Many date his conversion to Christianity as being just prior to the battle of Milvian bridge. However there is speculation that for many years he regarded the divine revelation he gained on that day as being from Apollo, and that many years later he altered the details to fit into a Christian paradigm. This does not suggest a sincere conversion. Though he did issue the edict of toleration a year later, he took no action against Paganism, the coins he continued to mint bore the images of Roman Gods, and the Arch of Constantine contain no references to Christ despite the fact that this arch commemorates his supposedly Christ given victory. What is far more likely is that Constantine simply sought to stabilise his Empire, and that his conversion, or rather the conversion of his Empire to Christianity was simply motivated by politics. Christianity, despite it's illegality and persecution (or perhaps because of) had won the hearts and minds of his subjects. He was simply siding with the winner for his own benefit. Indeed he was only baptised on his death bed. I do not believe my opponent has made a sufficient case for conversion, thank you.