Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?

[AbhiKerala]

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

You should really check out TLIG and read (quite) a bit. If you open your heart, you might understand what we are talking about, and why it is different from believing that comic characters are real.

The fact that you need some kind of God in your life after learning science is what I don't understand. As for missionaries like TLIG , they are just using people's suffering to gain more popularity. Nobody truly needs it but nobody knows that either.

[pe7erpark3r]

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r I will tell you what it's like to believe anime characters are real, Childish. :D

I agree that one could say that. However experiencing it is still something else. Experiencing a drug induced state of bliss will give you the experience of a profound view change, that makes sense in the moment you experience it. It will not leave you untouched. (Not talking from experiences, basically giving a summary of Sam Harris here). From then forward you will know that other world views are possible and make sense. It will in a way open your mind to something you had absolutely no relation to before, something you could not gauge at all. Same with how it is to drive a car in italy or experiencing God. Impossible to explain...

[Kaneki-kun]

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man I'm not trying to prove he existed. I'm just saying it is possible that a certain human named Jesus might have lived in that era and done some good deeds. I mean you dont have to be divine to do some good in the society. But his followers could easily spread news that he did something impossible. I mean we are talking about a 2000 year old civilization. I have seen people even in these times of science believing some random guy did some impossible things. If you think about it the Christian community could be really small in the time of his death , only a bunch of idiots maybe. But once such a powerful resurrection story spreads people will follow him naturally.
I'm pretty sure that the birth date of JC is fake and roots back to some pagan roman traditions. All new religions have copied from existing ones. Also the story of angels visiting him during his birthday could be fake too(probably made after his death).

But proving he lived scientifically is not easy considering there is no archaeological evidence. This also mean we can't say he did not live either. So the best way to put it would be Jesus was a normal human and his divinity was fabricated after his death by his followers to gain popularity for the religion.

@Kaneki-kun Everything you see happens inside your brain . If you can truly believe something exists you might see random things that look like it. You sound more idiotic as you try to sound more intelligent. No Offence ;)

You know, all ye who are chackra and meditation gurus (if that's you as your reasoning is no different from them) you think you're somewhere in your life. You think you have seeing light and on the true path to enlightenment. But you're just the favorites of the ruler of this world, the devil and his angels have feed you with truths beautiful as the moon light. You think you seeing the Sun light but you're just lost, youre guided by nature, Cosmo, universe (creations of God) . Your spiritualism is empty because you lack the Spirit of God.

You say I'm idiotic? Oh well let me be idiotic in Christ, it's far better than to be intelligent in the world.

[pe7erpark3r]

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

You should really check out TLIG and read (quite) a bit. If you open your heart, you might understand what we are talking about, and why it is different from believing that comic characters are real.

Science is a method of determining what objective reality is. It has its limits. We have no idea if anything science doesn't understand yet is true or false. Science is always based on experiment, on experience.

The fact that you need some kind of God in your life after learning science is what I don't understand. As for missionaries like TLIG , they are just using people's suffering to gain more popularity. Nobody truly needs it but nobody knows that either.

And sometimes you make experiences that clearly break through the limits of science. And I wasn't suffering especially before or suffering less after... Dude, you just do not know what you are talking about, its quite that simple. You do not have the experience we have.

[AbhiKerala]

@pe7erpark3r Dude my point is we can all experience what we want. You want some reality where we are all creations ? Yeah you can have that if you believe it that deep. Why do you think the Bible asks you to believe in the first place.

[AbhiKerala]

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

You say I'm idiotic? Oh well let me be idiotic in Christ, it's far better than to be intelligent in the world.

I truly wish you all the best in your adventures with him.

[Kaneki-kun]

@Vex-Man I said search your heart not follow your heart. And Christians ( born again people in Christ) and the rest of the world truly don't know how to pray, but it doesn't mean they don't know who to say a prayer.

(What is prayer? Prayer normally is a communication between man and God. But the people doesn't even know that. They think prayer is making noise and jumping around in the name of God and prayer. God is in constant listening mode on every heart, as a matter of fact the bible says "our souls (thus our hearts) are the very heart beats of God. So If you just humble yourself and seek God with the heart and mind of a baby you will definitely see His presence in your life)

Now what that scripture means in saying Christians don't know how to pray is I) they don't know what to pray for and ii) don't have the words to please God with their prayers unless led by the Spirit of God.
That's why He (The Holy Spirit) intercedes for us before God. In other words, He shapes our (Christians, born again people in Christ) prayers to the form and format that is pleasing to God.

And I can testify to that, when I became a born again Christian I knew shit about prayer, I didn't even feel like saying a prayer. When everyone else was praying my eyes were just closed and I'd be like an illiterate, just listening to others praying or I'd say a little prayer and that's it.
But then as I grew in Christianity (living like Christ) through the Spirit of God and His teachings I began to know how to pray. And when the need to pray comes He tells me exactly what to pray for, He gives me the words.

PERSONALY I don't need anyone on here to believe or even listen to what I'm saying. But this is my experience, this is my experiment, I tested the waters and The Truth revealed itself to me. I don't even come from a Christian family first of all but this is my testimony. Whoever wishes to say is bs can say #freedomofspeech..

but know y'all should know this *1 John 4:2-3 Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. Let he who has an ear hears wisdom and seize from foolishness.

[Kaneki-kun]

@pe7erpark3r God isn't even the God of religion it's just society that labeled Him like that. But yeah I understand for the sake of this discussion you have to put it like that.

The thing is many people don't even know what's God's name (and even Christians and many religious leaders) so they confuse Him with so many stuffs and rubbish.

Following the teachings of the Holy Spirit, God (I Am is His name) never brought any religion, from the Old to New Testament there nowhere stating that and if there is show me.
It was people, as you can read through out the Old Testament "The people of God" and at that time everything was by the law, and there was nothing like grace as we see today, so just anybody couldnt come and claim he's a "pupil of God" and it had to be like that.

Then Jesus Christ came with Grace and it cancelled condemnation by the law. So from there we started hearing about Christians and Christianity which first was a mockery and insult labelling followers of the teachings of Jesus. Then as time went on it became known by all and became a religion, a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion. And our times came where religion became the belief in and worship of a supernatural controlling power and a particular system of faith and worship. And people thirsty for power took advantage of it to control, rule and cause harm to society with the help of the devil, the pupil's ignorance and laziness.

[Kaneki-kun]

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r

I said kjv cuz compared to niv, nlt, and some translations there's no omission of verses. But yeah, when you experience Jesus and the Spirit of God personally into your life you don't need any philosopher, google, pastor or whatever to give you proves.

Yes, you should always get a translation that is close to the original! And if you want to compare biblehub.com's interlinear translation is a good place to get a feeling of what's really written in the original greek or hebrew text.

And just a note for @Vex-Man who always claims that we have no orginal of the bible: We have texts (in and out of the bible) that are 3000 years old and have been copied over the centuries. And the mistakes that are introduced over so many years are miniscule. So we can rely around 99.9% on the greek texts we have of the bible.

Bible says You need to believe to be able to see. Many of the world will know the Bible as much as Lucifer does and they'll derive philosophies from it whiles being led by false spirits. It's sad but it's OK, because unless you experience darkness you'll never acknowledged light. Because light IS and doesn't exist. People who live in clouds of darkness, conditioning and confusion if you tell them about The Light of the World they'll always tell you there's nothing like light because they don't know and don't even want to believe just a little bit something called 'Light' is ( "exist" in their terminology)

I wouldn't judge them so harshly. For believing is not the same as thinking. Believing is trust, and you need to learn trust, by trusting, by making experiences. If we could prove that God exists, they would not have won anything, but that now they think that God exists. But still they would not believe. And faith is what they really need.

Oh no I'm not judging them fam, I'm just saying the truth. I mean I don't think there's anything condemning in what I said

[spaceboy]

---

[the driver]

@Sij 100% agree with you.

[pe7erpark3r]

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r Dude my point is we can all experience what we want. You want some reality where we are all creations ? Yeah you can have that if you believe it that deep. Why do you think the Bible asks you to believe in the first place.

I'm sorry, I said it in this agressive way. I do not want that reality. I did not believe in this reality. I made an experience I did not think possible: recognizing His Voice. And it happened to me out of the blue. It's not like I believed afterwards though, it took me quite a while to accept the reality that God is (3 years).

The bible teaches us to believe because only believing is what saves us. But to the bible believing is not believing "that God is" or that "Jesus is God". Believing is to let yourself be guided by God, who is Love. Believing is to let Him slowly change you, to become an Image of His goodness for our brothers and sisters. As you can see, I'm clearly still on the way and unworthy of this calling, more than unworthy. But He loves me, and out of this Love, out of His wish to save me, he touched my heart, and began to guide me toward Him.

He will do so with you too, if you only give Him an honest chance. He will speak to You, if you only lower your voice enough, if you do not cling to material goods, or your own gifts and position. He will speak. He will tell you of His love for you, He will speak of how He created you out of love, and to give you the Gift of Himself, of Love Himself. He will speak of peace and reconciliation in a world that is only out for war. He will speak of forgiveness, and of repaying evil with love. He will speak.

And the moment you hear His Voice, which always speaks gently and softly, and always full of love, even if it speaks of the disasters we bring upon ourself, then you will know. He will reveal His Holy Face to you, and free you from the burdon of sin. He will replace your gods and idols, may they be gods of a religion or money or fame, with Himself. He will enthrone Himself in your heart, and speak to you from then on. He will guide you ever closer, purifying you from every sin. If you repent He will hurry to you, to console you, to dress you in Himself and guide you to Heaven, which is to guide you in His Sacred Heart. Trust in Him, and He will never forsaken you, He will not fail you.

To fear God is the beginning of wisdom. To know Him is to know Love Himself. To possess Him is the greatest good, a good that will be given to you, here and now. Listen to the Voice of Love.

[Indrid Cold]

I skimmed these pages and @spaceboy should probably get most kudos just for staying on-topic. But I'm not criticizing. As a veteran of debates like these, I can confirm that everyone has their own hobby-horse to shoe-horn into the debate. Would we really have it any other way?

Me, I long ago had my head turned by the books of Barbara Thiering, whose forensic, ultra-scholarly writing took in both the Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi and contemporary apocrypha, to suggest the J-Man was 'just' part of some Jewish-cult-to-end-all-Jewish-cults. The research not only seems detailed enough, but it also fits my personal level of pessimism about a tangible, interventionist God.

But if there's one thing I hate in religious debates (and sorry to the above users who've done it), it's when people draw a parallel between fictional characters like Batman, Spider-Man, etc, and Jesus / God. God, if He / It exists will necessarily transcend context. So if there's a story where Batman breaks down the fourth wall and boldy presumes to give the reader religious instructions (and even with the freak-out stories of Grant Morrison and Neil Gaiman, I don't think there has been), you can legitimately compare him to Jesus. But not until then.

Also, I stand with @AllAboutGay on the existence of The Gays in ancient antiquity. This prehistoric skelington has the same distinctive gap in his teeth as John Inman:

[pe7erpark3r]

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

Then Jesus Christ came with Grace and it cancelled condemnation by the law. So from there we started hearing about Christians and Christianity which first was a mockery and insult labelling followers of the teachings of Jesus. Then as time went on it became known by all and became a religion, a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion. And our times came where religion became the belief in and worship of a supernatural controlling power and a particular system of faith and worship. And people thirsty for power took advantage of it to control, rule and cause harm to society with the help of the devil, the pupil's ignorance and laziness.

I agree, that the belief in, as in thinking that God is, instead of true belief is false. But be careful not to judge the works of the Holy Spirit. In John 17:22-23:

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Jesus prays to the father for the unity of His disciples, so that the world may see, that Jesus is sent by the father. The world cannot see the works of the spirit, it cannot see the love in the hearts, for the world is unspiritual and guided by false spirits as you said correctly. The world can only recognize the outward unity of Jesus' true disciples. So for this prayer to be fullfilled we need to be united. Yes, true unity is in the heart, but what is in the heart will shine outwardly. Do listen to the Voice of God, for it calls out for unity and reconciliation. It is the Voice of Love, and if you really know His Voice in your heart, you will recognize Him too in His revelations of our times. Do not judge the way others worship our Lord, for you might be judging Him.

[pe7erpark3r]

@Indrid-Cold said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I skimmed these pages and @spaceboy should probably get most kudos just for staying on-topic. But I'm not criticizing. As a veteran of debates like these, I can confirm that everyone has their own hobby-horse to shoe-horn into the debate. Would we really have it any other way?

Who would not :joy:

Me, I long ago had my head turned by the books of Barbara Thiering, whose forensic, ultra-scholarly writing took in both the Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi and contemporary apocrypha, to suggest the J-Man was 'just' part of some Jewish-cult-to-end-all-Jewish-cults. The research not only seems detailed enough, but it also fits my personal level of pessimism about a tangible, interventionist God.

But you have read up on her critics in the meantime, like a good boi(ntellectual) I suppose :yum:

But if there's one thing I hate in religious debates (and sorry to the above users who've done it), it's when people draw a parallel between fictional characters like Batman, Spider-Man, etc, and Jesus / God. God, if He / It exists will necessarily transcend context. So if there's a story where Batman breaks down the fourth wall and boldy presumes to give the reader religious instructions (and even with the freak-out stories of Grant Morrison and Neil Gaiman, I don't think there has been), you can legitimately compare him to Jesus. But not until then.

Good point yeah. Why do you always come up with points I'd never ever think of?

Also, I stand with @AllAboutGay on the existence of The Gays in ancient antiquity. This prehistoric skelington has the same distinctive gap in his teeth as John Inman:

I love your humor! And yeah, totally. Maybe we all descend from a gay couple after all...

[Indrid Cold]

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

But you have read up on her critics in the meantime, like a good boi(ntellectual) I suppose

Well, look, of course. But besides that (permission to go off-topic?), I can't believe my position is unique: I'm less concerned about whether the miracles and preachings of Jesus really happened as much as that there's just anything, any story, that can distract us from the greedy, ugly vibe that pervades life on Earth. Y'know. If there was a religion that doted on Tina Charles songs, I'd be there.

[pe7erpark3r]

@spaceboy said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I mean @pe7erpark3r here and not an apostle. And my thoughts were relates about Jesus mentioning in early Christian's apocrypha. And the ideas of these texts are far different from the official version. Fog cannot appear without a fire. That make me think, that someone existed. Yeshua or maybe he had another name. Someone was crucified. It was very popular type of execution in Rome of those time. And the execution of these man, became a start point of Christianity religion. That what I mean under words 'Historical Jesus'.

A very good point, and I like the analogy (fog + fire).

P. S.: Unfortunately we won't know the truth about those events. I mean the real story-line, the real chain of events.. Maybe Zarathustra will know, or Abdul Alhazred.. But not we..

You will see, that there is quite a bit of evidence, that the ghospel's accounts (in large parts) are in fact historical, when the debate procedes. I hope @Vex-Man returns :sweat_smile:

[pe7erpark3r]

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

Here is what Josephus wrote-
18.3.3 — “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.
For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the
truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when,
upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those
who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored
to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him.
And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”

First let me quote wikipedia on the testamonium flavianum:

The first and most extensive reference to Jesus in the Antiquities, found in Book 18, states that Jesus was the Messiah and a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate. It is commonly called the Testimonium Flavianum. Almost all modern scholars reject the authenticity of this passage in its present form, while the majority of scholars nevertheless hold that it contains an authentic nucleus referencing the execution of Jesus by Pilate, which was then subject to Christian interpolation and/or alteration. The exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear, however.

I agree with this definition. I too am convinced, that Flavius Josephus did not believe in Jesus to be the messiah.

20.9.1 — “...brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was
James...”
The point should be noted the phrase “was called Christ” is awful and some transcriber inserted it. The later lines which Josephs referred to Jesus was the son of Damneus. That sentences looks like a christian was hoping to prove that Jesus existed.

The phrase "who was called Christ" is a perfectly common phrase. And this is why (quoting wiki again:)

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the second reference to Jesus in the Antiquities, found in Book 20, Chapter 9, which mentions "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James." This reference is considered to be more authentic than the Testimonium.

Josephus, when he wrote the Antiquities of the Jews in 93-94 AD, clearly must have known about christians, if not Jesus himself, since there is enough (archeological + other) evidence that they were present in israel. If he didn't mention christians at all, that would have to be considered unbelievable.

There was never ever a “tribe of Christians”

The name christian was first used in a derogatory way to denote the followers of Christ who did not acknowledge the emperor of Rome. With this in mind it becomes clear why Flavius Josephus – who did not believe in Christ to be the messiah – could use the term in this way. He too saw Jesus as a nobody, and he spoke in the language that the people of his time used. Tribe of Christians sounds rather derogatory in my ears, so it fits the idea.

If you did read his texts carefully, you would know his texts were out of the context. There was a paragraph around his texts and it really interrupts his story line. This is how next paragraph begins from, "About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder...". It was referred to the previous paragraph in which Pilate along with his soldiers did massacre of Jews in Jerusalem

In the whole chapter (and the paragraph before) Josephus speaks about Pilates' reign in Jerusalem, and the things he dealt with. Thus speaking about Jesus at this place makes perfect sense. And to introduce the next important event during Pilates' time with "About the same time..." makes perfect sense. Of course I acknowledge that "another sad calamity" might still belong to the christian addition. Also a backreference to two or three paragraphs before is a perfectly normal thing.

Josephus did write about minor-minor people of his time extensively. A single paragraph written on Messiah is impossible.

As said before, I do agree with the majority of scholars that Josephus did not believe in Jesus to be the messiah, nor consider him to be of great importance.

[Zack Williamson]

@spaceboy said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

My counter question to you- If Spiderman did not exist, why children or even adults talk about him now ?

Spiderman was appeared first in comics nearly 40 years ago, and we can discuss him now, because of mass media. Will he be so popular in 4019?

1962 plus 2000 = 3962. Yes, he may become the most famous character.

In classical logic, we call it argument from Popularity though.
Popularity of someone does not justify truth or reason.

Or maybe next crusade will be done in a name of Tony Stark? Who knows.. :smiling_face_with_open_mouth_closed_eyes:

Those people who fought for the name of their religion, believed in lies. When they cannot and could not give any evidence for their supported beliefs, they initialized a fight. Your analogy is absurd here. People do not fight because spider-man has given a commandment for “I am true and other fictional characters are false.” Suppose a group of kids believe in spider-man only and second group believes in Batman only. The doctrine of spider man instructs his followers to fight and fight until the followers of other religions do not get ceased. (My last three sentences contain surah no 9 verse no 13 and 14 of the Koran; One commandment of Biblic God)

Muhammad lived nearly 1500 years ago, and people are speaking about him today.

Muhammad did not exist. There is no proof of his existence either. People are talking about harry potter too today.

Yeshua lived nearly 2000 years ago, and people are speaking about him today.

I say he did not. Prove me wrong ! People are talking about superman too today.

Siddhartha lived nearly 2500 years ago, and he is also well known.

Siddhartha existed as a person and he was a skeptic. He was neither a God nor a messenger of God. We are talking about a theist’s existence, not a skeptic’s. He himself rejected any fictional character or God.

I have a video for you (for most characters)-

Others also can be mentioned here in this list.

I like your last line- Others also can be mentioned here in this list. There were more than 10 deities of Egypt, Persia and Greece before the birth of Jesus. All those deities have same stories like Jesus.
Under the rule of Constantine, Faith-head Christians burnt off their teachings and did not let them to copy their books.

And those events were happened, when humanity have no ability to communicate so fast and worldwide as now,

100 percent true

but at the same time all these persons become world known. Personally for me it means, that the event had a historical-cultural weight, and persons which are related to these events can not be excluded, like a fictional characters.

Show me those historical-cultural evidences first. You have shown me only 2 writers, as far as I know- Josephus and Tacitus. Both were not even contemporary eye-witnesses for giving any evidence for Jesus existence who supposedly lived on our earth. There is around 100 years of Gap between their earliest writings and Jesus' alleged birth.

Nice points about Josephus and Tacitus, I like that. I wish to divein more in it.

Thank you.

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

As Peter mentioned, besides the Gospels at the beginning of the first century, there were lot's of apocrypha that were also based on the events that happened to Jesus. (Lately all this books were banned, by the church, but some of them have been saved to the present day. The Nag Hammadi library for example.)

Paul and Peter never referred to Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary or Golgotha or any other pilgrim. Paul did not write about earthly existence, life and his teachings. The epistles which were the part of paul’s writing, were written after 48 CE. Both did not mention any type of miracle which worked, his trial, his virgin birth, his disciples or the empty tomb

I mean @pe7erpark3r here and not an apostle. And my thoughts were relates about Jesus mentioning in early Christian's apocrypha.

Christian’s apocrypha was written by his disciples, not by his messengers. We do not even know his disciples existed or not.

And the ideas of these texts are far different from the official version. Fog cannot appear without a fire.

Fog cannot appear without a fire through gaps. His first two disciples (peter and mark) supposedly existed a long time after Jesus’ death.

That make me think, that someone existed. Yeshua or maybe he had another name. Someone was crucified. It was very popular type of execution in Rome of those time. And the execution of these man, became a start point of Christianity religion. That what I mean under words 'Historical Jesus'.

Osiris/Serapis, Inanna/Ishtar, Horus, Perseus, Bacchus/Dionysus, Attis, Isis, Hermes, Romulus, Adonis, Hercules/Heracles, Zalmoxis, Tammuz, Asclepius, Krishna, and Prometheus.- All had same character like Jesus. Many of them were got died by violence and resurrected. One God among them might be existed. All had a divine mother and a divine father. All of them were tried to be killed by monsters/tyrants when they were infants. Many of above gods' birth was announced by their stars.

Adonis, Inanna, Osiris, Romulus, Zalmoxis --- got 'a type of baptism or communion', all 5 Gods won over their deaths, all 5 Gods were son or daughter of a God and they all predates Christianity. Even though all five were savior Gods and went thru struggles or thru sufferings.

Before the execution of Christians and in 4 to 5th centuries their scriptures were burnt. The Opponents and religion people of those Persian, Greek and Egypt mythologies and non-orthodox competing christian versions were compelled by threat of death and prison, or of dispossession to fall in line.

P. S.: Unfortunately we won't know the truth about those events. I mean the real story-line, the real chain of events.. Maybe Zarathustra will know, or Abdul Alhazred.. But not we..

Agree.

The following reply is for pet, not for spaceboy-

@pe7erpark3r Start a new thread and make rules of a debate first. You did not make any rule of this debate. You won't define my position, I will. You are not vex man. That debate will be pursued between 1 on 1 (only you and me). I won't educate you every time. If you don't know how to make a thread, I can make one. You cannot invite me and get my position yourself.

I am not here to educate you. I hoped that you know general English. Here is a Wikipedia article for defining which statement is affirmative and which is negative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmation_and_negation

Affirmative sentence- vex man goes with his girlfriend on a date.
Negative sentence- vex man does not go with his girlfriend on a date.
Interrogative sentence- Does Vex man go with his girlfriend on a date ?
Interrogative negative- Doesn't Vex man go with his girlfriend on a date ?
Imperial sentence- Go vex man with your girlfriend on a date
Exclamatory sentence- Aha ! vex man goes with his girlfriend on a date

A negative sentence consists of ----------Does not, did not, may not, shall not, will not, were not, was not, was never, is never, is not, are not, am not, am never etc
A positive or affirmative sentence consists of --------Does, do, might, may, shall, will, can etc.

I also hope you will behave in a new debate. Whenever you run out of rational arguments, you clutch personal offenses.
@AbhiKerala, @Indrid-Cold, @spaceboy, @Kaneki-kun, @Sij All 5 users behave with enough respect and manners.

P.S. if you dont know what a theistic god is, you cannot misinterpret anyone's position. You can ask me or you can look for Google. A 'Theistic god' is always related to philosophy, not to any specific religion. I was debating about philosopical god in that thread. In this debate, we had to debate jesus existed as a person or not. The problem with you is, you dont read between the lines and you always want to go ahead.

I never said Christ (as a person) did not exist with/without absolute certainty. We were debating Jesus as a person exist or not. We weren't debating Jesus existed as a god or not or a philosophical god existed or not in this thread. These are three different thesis. I hope you understand the difference among all 3 thesis. If you had presumed something into your mind, you would not have imposed your presumption on your opponent. My thesis for Mr. Jesus' existence will be-

Jesus' (as a person) existence seems to be improbable to me [Edited: just like you misinterpreted I too misinterpreted]

[A Former User]

@AllAboutGay I thought you were going to explain a theory about Jesus being gay. XD 👍