>>No, I don't like to hear things that upset me either but I don't run away from them. Seeing as you have however set your unilateral limited scope let's see if this suits you.<<

Guy, get used to the fact that I don't care about your well being and refuse to pursue that line of debate. Debate it with someone else. We're talking about the historicity of Jesus here and that is all I am going to comment on. If you're not feeling well, go see a doctor but leave it off this thread please because I, for one, don't care.

>>Did Jesus exist?<<

No.


>>No cut and paste.<<

The only thing I've cut and pasted is Josephus's words.

>>No sidestepping.<<

Don't tell me. Tell that to everybody talking about Parson Weems and Judge Crater and all this other garbage that has nothing to do with anything instead addressing the issues I've been trying to raise here. I don't really mind it because it demonstrates they are unable to debate me, that they have no evidence to support anything they are asserting and that their only response is to mock and ridicule in the pathetic belief that it somehow scores them points. But I will not respond to it. Stick to the subject if you want a response from me.

>>No discussions on what type of person he was or was not. Did he exist.<<

No. He was Julius Caesar redone by Roman royals to once again rule the masses--the man who would be king except he didn't want the title. Same recycled garbage.

>>BTW - It was you that chose to change the subject in hand to the state of my mind. Not me. Will you comment on that?<<

This thread is filled with examples that prove that, as usual, you're blowing smoke. Stick to the subject, please.

>>If so why have you not yet responded. It is, after all, one of the subjects you chose to throw out so freely. Or do you not have any arguments to back up that supposition?<<

This thread is filled with examples that prove that, as usual, you're blowing smoke. Stick to the subject, please.