Given the initial claim was his, he should have done this first of course, but the real hilarity is him dismissing my citation, when all he offered was an anecdotal claim.
a) It’s your claim, so you evidence it.
b) @CyberLN did find information that contradicted your claim, as have others of course.
So far and fairly predictably, all you have offered in response is handwaving, and sophistry.
Again, sigh…I would guess the archeologist you are talking about is Dr. Jodi Magness. She does not, in fact think that Nazareth didn’t exist until hundreds of years after Jesus supposedly existed.
Below is a citation for that…words from her own mouth at minute 1:25. I didn’t watch the entire video since I’m just not that interested in the subject matter.
It appears you have relied on a video you watched long enough ago and had a feeble enough impact on you that you are unable to remember even the presenter’s name.
I, on the other hand, was able to find not only her name but also contradictions to your assertions during an Internet search in a matter of seconds. Because of this, I have determined that any prior or future assertions you make are highly suspect. FAFO.
It’s nice to see your picture.
She DOES say that no human objects were found older than the year 100 at Bethlehem and only a farm house at Nazareth. Watch the whole video. I was not referencing her when I said they did not exist until hundreds of years later. According to a book I read, in 325 Emperor Constantine, who wanted to make christianity the state religion of Rome, found out there was not Nazareth. If you are going to have a Jesus of Nazareth, you better have a town with that name. So he renamed a town Nazareth and that is how Nazareth got its name. I don’t care what you suspect.
I gave you enough information to find it and so you did.
More handwaving, more claims, a vague reference to an unnamed book. You have not addressed the citations offered that demonstrate your claim is dubious. Dr Bart Ehrman has spent his entire adult life studying the biblical claims and history of that period and region, he is considered an expert, and rightly so, and he is an atheist, so has no stake in this beyond the objective facts.
As @CyberLN says, she states plainly 1:25 in, that she “does believe Nazareth existed at the time of Jesus”… her own words…
So cite exactly in that video where you are claiming she makes the claim you have assigned her, otherwise why would anyone believe your claim.
Watch the video. I am not going to hold your hand.
You are the one exhibiting a closed mind. You know nothing about proof theory. So it is no wonder that you cannot recognize a proof or a contradiction.
Go to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy online and learn something.
So you can’t support your lie, quelle surprise, I doubt anyone is surprised. You think you can bluff your claims through all cogent objections, dream on…what’s truly hilarious is I doubt you’ve watched that video yourself, or you’d a) know it contradicted your claim at 1:25, and b) be able to quickly cite where it evidenced your claim, your post are hilarious fair play, I am now dubious you’re an atheists at all, just a troll, and a poor one at that.
…he said, closed mindedly…try stamping your foot, it can’t be any less lame than your infantile “no you are” response.
Wrong again champ…
It is a branch of mathematical logic, a study of mathematical proofs and provability, treating proofs as formal mathematical objects and analysing their structure and properties using mathematical techniques.
It’s a lie, not a wonder, and I encourage everyone to read these exchanges and see how many sweeping claims you have made, and the zero number of times you have tried to evidence them when your bullshit has been called. You’re not the first grandiloquent bluffer we’ve encountered.
They’re your claims champ, if you think that tome supports them, then offer quotes, page and chapter. Though I must say that tome has been cited repeatedly by religious apologists on here, and usually to cite it’s archaic philosophical definition of atheism, they always take it badly when it’s rejected. So now I am wondering if we don’t have a theist troll, maybe even a sock puppet account?
Your ball, Bullwinkle…
I did too, just to make sure I had not lost my mind. The claim is simply ludicrous. It took about 10 seconds to check.
This is an ad hominem. This is not your first one. Please read the PM sent to you regarding this behavior.
Oh, for fuck sake! You made the assertion that those towns did not exist until a few hundred years after the supposed life of Jesus. I asked for a citation. You fucking provided your memory of a video of hers as a citation.
Please cite the objective evidence that Jesus is (100%) “a made-up fictional character”, we are still waiting.
Still waiting for you to properly objectively evidence this one as well.
and this one…I am also curious how Jesus had a fucking tomb, if as you claim he was 100% fictional? Christ this is funny…
Hmm, 100% you say? The objective evidence should be easy to cite then, off you go?
Absolute
adjective
An unfalsifiable idea need not remain so, they can only be assessed based on our current epistemological limits. Thus they are not absolute claims…
Still waiting for anything beyond this bare claim?
Only if one is closed minded. That something is supported by a weight of objective evidence so that it cannot reasonably be denied, does not suggest it is immutable, ipso facto it is not an absolute…by definition…
Who claimed that “no claim is irrefutable”? Though this claim would not be an absolute of course, since irrefutable claims are not immutable.
Still waiting for you to explain which principle of logic my disbelief violated, and why? And I suspect that wait is what I shall do…
Nope, I could be wrong for example, though in this case I am dubious.
A risible contradiction…
Exact? You don’t even take a stab at it, or the fucking author ffs… 
Well by now we’ve seen you squirm and tap dance away from even trying to evidence this one…
I linked his own blog ffs…
That’s where he said it, and I quoted the text verbatim. The fucking title at the top of the page is “Did Nazareth Exist?” and athe exact point that CITATION links to is the title " There is Archaeological Evidence Nazareth Existed"…you are a clown fair play…
Oh really?
So which is it?
Wait? I thought you were not citing that archaeologist? Here:
Oh dear, liar liar pants on fire etc etc…
The video is “Holy Land Revealed” Jodi Magness in The Great Courses
Is it too early to run a sweep on another flounce?
Yeah, @CyberLN already linked her video, and she directly contradicted your claim at 1 minute and 25 seconds, anyone can watch the link @CyberLN provided above, in this thread.
You have managed to come up with a name only after someone else found it for you, and the person that you cited in the video, directly contradicts the claim you assigned to her.
Dear oh dear…
This is just too funny…I am laughing so hard, that I am shaking like a shitting dog…
A flounce is now at evens… 10 to 1 on…
Watch the rest of the video, oh dear oh dear.
which fucking video?
The one he is too fucking lazy (or too fucking incompetent, take your pick) to link to and watch himself, in order to give us a timestamp. As linked to by @CyberLN above; The experience excuse - #102 by CyberLN