The Gospels portray a consistent picture of Jesus peace be upon him.

Rebuttals"The ‘main issue’ of this debate is the consistency in the gospels regarding Jesus (especially in their portrayal of his divinity). My burden a. is to prove the gospels are not all consistent in this regard and b. to rebut Pro’s evidences of Christ’s divinity in Mark."This is what I have been claiming."Both of which I have continued to do so only up until round 3 and a bit of 4, because Pro simply refuses to continue or offer anymore rebuttals, answer them or concede. Rather he claims he has a response available to be provided elsewhere. I’ve already explained how this is an unfair tactic in my previous round. There is a reason why this debate is formatted at maximum flexibility (10000 characters, 72 hours to respond, 5 rounds), to allow the best and complete rebuttals and arguments without compromise."What I have been doing is not a "tactic." It is not as though I am saying that I have hidden answers somewhere and am using that as my argument. Rather, I have chosen not to respond to certain points that you made that have become irrelevant due to the nature of the debate at this point."There is no new added clause. From the very first round I have been questioning the reliability of the gospels due to their inconsistencies regarding Jesus and his portrayal, which I have spent much time proving."An added clause to the resolution. The resolution, which is what is argued in a debate, mentions nothing about the reliability of the gospels."It is clear beyond daylight that Pro took on this burden, because he went on explaining why he believed the gospels to be reliable in his actual rebuttal, “I will explain why within my actual rebuttals.” (round 2)"As I have stated each time that this point has been raised, as well as in my original statements on the subject, what I said then was merely biographical information. Saying that I would explain why I held those beliefs within my rebuttals does not bind me to proving those beliefs to be true to win the debate (especially since the resolution never mentions such a topic)."In fact I have not made any such admission [that Mark casts Jesus as divine in the opening statement of his gospel]. Pro has not yet addressed what I’ve brought to his attention in the 3rd and 4th round, It explains why I have not made such admission."My opponent certainly did nothing to refute it, and went on to make arguments that were based on it being true."a. Pro has failed to provide any further rebuttals or refutations to my evidences of inconsistencies and differences (in round 3) regarding Jesus and his divinity in the gospels. b. Pro has failed to provide any further rebuttals or refutations to my continued scrutiny (round 3) of his evidences for Christ’s divinity in Mark.c. For part of the debate Pro had fallen into a habit of arguing with common interpretations of certain verses without any evidential basis."Again, this is irrelevant due to my central point at this stage in the debate."d. Pro has been consistent in summarising my position on certain issues out of context."I could make the same assertion about Con. Regardless, this certainly does not mean that I have lost the debate."e. He has managed to contradict himself on whether the gospels are consistent or not. I pointed this out in round 4."Correction: I said that the gospels contain inconsistencies, something that any Christian (even those who believe in inerrancy) will admit. What I have contested from the beginning of the debate is that the gospels are inconsistent to the degree that Mark portrays Christ as human while later gospels portray him as divine."f. Pro has repeatedly ignored to address certain issues I repeatedly brought to his attention. g. Pro claims he has his responses ready elsewhere outside of this debate."More of the same confusion and attempts to exploit my desire to preserve the integrity of the debate by focusing on the main issue.ConclusionI would like to conclude this debate by thanking my opponent for what has been an intellectually stimulating conversation and by offering a summary of the debate. 1. The resolution says that we are to debate whether or not the gospels portray a consistent picture of Christ. 2. My opponent's opening statements confirm this. 3. I acknowledge that the gospels contain inconsistencies but contest that they are inconsistent to the degree that Christ is not portrayed as divine in Matthew. 4. I raise the point that Mark opens his gospel by portraying Christ as divine and the fulfillment of a prophecy. 5. My opponent never attempts to refute this point and implicitly affirms it. 6. Because Mark's gospel portrays Christ as divine in its opening, it can be said to be consistent with the other gospels in that it portrays Christ as divine. 7. This cannot be said to be Mark's personal belief that did not affect the account, since we learn of this belief within the account. Thank you again for a great debate.