There exists historically accurate evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed

As this is the final round we can not bring any new claims forth and must make a conclusion. I will address my opponent's last round and write my conclusion. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ "Tacitus: Was he in a position to offer reliable, primary-source testimony? You weren't there. You do not know. " This is the equivalent of saying nothing in history can be judged. "Did he, in fact, offer a historically-reliable account? That's what we're debating on. " Yet, you have not made a single proper rebuttal of my information, you make a claim after claim and provide no evidence for any of them. "Did their testimonies survive to the present substantially unaltered and intact? It seems so. If it isn't, it was just changed to be more understandable. " Even if it did that proves nothing about him providing reliable information, which he most likely did not because of the reasons I already provided and you did not make a rebuttal on. "We only have the present. When you're in the present, you don't have the past to use, only what exists in the present. So if we look at what exist today and it fits what happened in the past, that event is historically reliable. " This is your claim, you have not provided evidence for such a claim that I have not made a rebuttal on. "For Jesus, we have the bible, and all the other documents, like this part from Tacitus's:" I have already shown how the New Testament is NOT reliable, I also showed hot Tacitus did NOT provide historically reliable information. You also failed to provide a source for your quote, meaning that it is worthless in this debate. "He said that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate. Since when could that mean something else? They couldn't have changed that part! " I also provided an explanation for this. Christus does not mean Jesus, it is a title that can belong to MANY people. He also did not have access to any official documents, if they even exist, about the execution. "Now, "virtually all MODERN SCHOLARS agree that Jesus existed": "1. The conclusion is founded off of what documents exist WITHOUT looking at the historical accuracy of the documents" I'll bet you they did! You don't know they didn't! " I have actually interviewed historians. One used Josephus to provide evidence for Jesus and later in the conversation said that Josephus's claim about Jesus was not historically reliable (as I pointed out its unreliability above). ""2. The majority of Scholars that specialize in this time period are Christians, hence there is a VERY possible bias" Yes, it is certain that they have a bias. But it is also certain that the atheists you got your info from have biases! Everyone does. " You are saying I got all this information from atheists, but I have been addressing the majority of these documents with the same claim that the majority of scholars and historians make, including the Christian scholars. ""3. Psychology shows that since the overwhelming number of Christian Scholars say Jesus existed the minority of non-Christian scholars would tend to agree" Show the resource. That's impossible, because Christians are Christians because they believe Jesus existed and is God! " Since you asked, . https://www.psychologicalscience.org... "So "Christian Scholars" that you say are really "Atheist Scholars", by definition. "" How do you come to this conclusion with anything that has been stated? ""4. Overall, not always, the scholars that do NOT believe in a historical Jesus actually make better arguments than those that say he existed. " Show the resource. How could you say that they make "better arguments? "" This is one that I cannot provide sources for as it is a personal opinion. "1. No, it says "some scholars". " No, it does not. I even copied and pasted that text. Also, for more evidence: . http://tinypic.com... A picture of that webpage with the section highlighted. "2. Probably atheists. Biased atheists. " Where is your evidence? This seems to be denying your own source. "3. Could have been someone else's tomb, but again, they could've been biased atheists. " You have no proof for this. _______________________________________________________________________________________- I have successfully shown how the documents are not historically reliable. My opponent has not even addressed the issue and instead chose the focus on "Is Jesus a historical figure" when the topic of the debate is "There exists historically accurate evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed". In my opponents second round he tried refuting my evidence by saying that I am not a scholar. He also argued that if Pilate existed that Jesus existed. Both of these are fallacious. In my opponents third round he simply said that scholars say Jesus existed and linked Google searches to try and make a rebuttal of my break down of the Gospels. The first thing does not address the topic of the debate, the second is not evidence or an argument. The only thing that he did that can be seen as an argument was bringing up his Jesus' tomb claim, but I showed how that claim is not supported. In my opponents forth round he argued without sources, he brought up Tacitus as evidence without refuting my breakdown of his works about Jesus not being historically reliable. He also ignored my point that Christus does not mean Jesus that I brought up earlier as well. He then proceeded to making many assumptions and even made a blatant lie about his own source about his Jesus' tomb claim. In conclusion, my opponent has barely even addressed the topic of the debate. His arguments were mostly unsupported. He did not make a rebuttal of my breakdown of different pieces of "evidence" and just made a claim that they can be used, and those claims were not supported with evidence either. My opponent also made a lot of assumptions in his debate. Lastly, my opponent lied about his own source for the only thing that can be seen as a real argument in this debate after I showed it was not historically reliable.