Jesus Christ never existed.
Debate Rounds (3)
Due to the difficulty of proving a negative, the burden of proof must fall upon my opponent, Con. Therefore, I make no further argument for the first round.
Thank you for making this argument.
I will argue that Jesus has existed! Jesus existed because there was many documents from the Roman government that showed his existence (http://www.bethinking.org...) and pieces of his crucifix were recovered (http://www.livescience.com...). There is a lot of evidence that shows he did exist, but I will say, not documented evidence he was the son of god (But I am a Christian myself, and I will admit).
First I want to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
The evidence of Pliny and Tacitus has been called into question. As for the livescience, it says the Bible is the most reliable source.
In fact, your own livescience link shows the problem with the wood chips.
"In brief, if all the pieces that could be found were collected together, they would make a big shipload. Yet the Gospel testifies that a single man was able to carry it.""
My problem with the Bible, is that there is so many extraordinary stories, that it makes it hard to figure out if there is any credibility at all. Jonah and the whale, turning water into wine, walking on water, parting the red sea, a virgin birth, resurrection, and so forth.
To boot, the bible has been translated a bunch of times. It took 1,600 years to write the Bible. 
I just can't see the Bible as a historically accurate piece of literature. Then, some of the historical facts of the bible have been disproved, like the exodus from Egypt.
"Similarly, although some of the events in both the Old and New Testaments are recorded in history, the Biblical writers make a hash of it. Historians generally believe that there was no exodus of Jewish slaves out of Egypt as described in the Bible, " 
Impact, the Bible credibility seems questionable at best.
You did not refute the Roman documents that was in the sources. I also did admit in the last round that some stories of the Bible aren't very credible (but I believe they are fables for learning).
I think the problem with your argument is that you kept tackling the Bible too much because there was other pieces of evidence in the other sources. I won't make statements for the next arguments you made because they only repreat what I admitted.
Thank you for your arguments!
Also, just because Latin is a dead language doesn't mean the documents are false. I hoped the rebuttals would have been stronger but I was glad to have this debate in the first place.
Thank you and good luck in the voting stage.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.