I continue to remember that you've provided no reply to your false claim of support by name-dropping church fathers without providing any quotes, nor your feeble attempt to discredit my legitimate quotes from them merely by claiming not to recognize them. I also am awaiting a reply to my detailed in-context explanations of the Biblical phrases you misquoted completely out of context; your attempt to entirely evade answering by pointing out that I quoted without providing references is noted but disregarded as hypocritical (since I was responding to you quoting without providing references).
You have made no point about anything I have posted except some version of "I'm right and you're wrong! Am too! Nuh huh!"
You're stooping to lie about this debate by saying that kind of thing. I've made many points.
My point here is that your argument fails unless you provide evidence for your claim that:
If the Jews were wrong, when Jesus taught about man’s eternal fate, such as eternal punishment, He would have corrected them. Jesus did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell must have been correct.
The evidence you've provided shows that the Jews in AD 600 (the archaeological date of the document you provided) believed in gehenna as a place of destruction, torment, and salvation. That evidence fails to support your argument specifically because it's WAY too late to show anything about Jesus' contemporaries. More importantly it doesn't support your argument because you claim the Jews were "correct," but the evidence you offer shows the Jews who believe that document
disagree with you about Gehenna. Either way your evidence doesn't prove your claims.
Then, you claimed to deal with my
point about the dating of the Talmud:
As for the dating of the Talmud.
There you offer evidence provided by a modern webpage about Judaism. But even if the author of that webpage was correct about everything, and the Rabbinic Jews he's quoting were right about everything (and I completely disagree), you fail to see that he's writing about the Mishnah, not the Talmud.
You got the wrong document. The Mishnah doesn't include any of the text you quoted.
So my complaint against you isn't foggy or vague. I'm not claiming you're saying "nothing". I'm pointing out that you're WRONG about the evidence you've cited. Directly factually wrong, and on matters which are materially important to your argument.
You can prove that you're right by showing that my points are WRONG. You can't do that by lying that I haven't said anything except "Am too, nuh huh", or that they're "opinions."
