Speechless

[madog]

That didn't answer my question and certainly isn't empirical evidence that the "Son of God" was crucified  ....

A group of people can state they knew some people that saw a man that claimed he was the historic napoleon Bonaparte being run over by a car. Even though I might even question this first/second hand account as empirical evidence, I would certainly discount that their account as empirical evidence that the man was actually the historic Napoleon Bonaparte.

I think that a circumstantial case can be made, that Jesus was the Son of God.  And some of it may be considered empirical evidence (seeing the miracles). 

Are you talking about a modern day automobile?   There where steam powered vehicles during Napoleon's time.   But yes, my first question would be, why they thought it was Napoleon Bonaparte.

You are being very dishonest here, you stated "The Gospel is based on empirical evidence as well" the Gospel is based on the Crucifixion of the "Son of God" .... Did you just make that statement to win another argument and hoped it would slip by?

I have asked for the empirical evidence for the Gospel because you said it exists ... not evidence that a some ordinary man was nailed to a cross, this is nothing special in Roman times and isn't the teachings of the Gospel ....

You are now saying "I think that a circumstantial case can be made, that Jesus was the Son of God" .... why are you wasting my time?



As for "steam powered vehicle" question, more of your equivocation   a) I explicitly stated the victim CLAIMED he was Napoleon Bonaparte  b) even if it was stated it was a one legged donkey drawn vehicle, their accounts were inconsistent with much stronger historical evidence ...