you can understand it both ways, you can say his body withstood the damage as in it wasn't damaged (which wouldn't be true), or you can understand it as in (his body withstood the damage and) it kept its primary function, which is to keep you alive-
durable/durability does not mean it will receive no damage, it means it can last/exist for a long time and through extensive wear without significant deterioration, as in it will retain it's functionality, if you have a durable car it doesn't mean it will be pitch perfect in 15 years, it just means it will still be working, same for ''withstand'', if a car withstood 15 years of use it would NOT be pitch perfect.
Again, no, that's not what withstood meant. To be unaffected by something means the state you were in after you interacted with it is the same as the state you were in before you interacted with it. In this case, the bullets is what Corazon interacted with. The state Corazon was in before he interacted with the bullets was not the same as the state he was in after he interacted with the bullets, meaning the bullets affected. If to withstand means to be unaffected by, according the definition Varia is choosing to use in his argument, then Corazon did not withstand them as he was affected by the bullets. If to withstand if part of durability, and Corazon didn't withstand them, then it's not a feat of durability. Plain and simple.
To your car analogy, a car that is still functioning after 15 years did not withstand 15 years because, according to the source Varia is using to base his argument, to withstand means to be unaffected by. A car that has ran for 15 years would be affected by that passage of time, so it did not withstand it. The analogy does not work. The bolded doesn't apply to the argument Varia and I are having due to the fact that is a different source of information that Varia is using. Varia asserted that durability is to withstand from a source, and his source says that to withstand means undamaged and unaffected. At this point, I'm arguing that Varia's argument is wrong.
Once again you don't understand what is being unaffected and undamaged.
Read my post again instead of lashing with your emotion.
Lol you think you're right?
How can I be wrong about my own opinion?
This is always like you, you think you are right about everything.
You are too arrogant and stupid to see that you are WRONG.
1. Pissed on you about Doflamingo's ability being revealed
2. Pissed on you who holds the highest position in Doffy's crew
3. Complete and utter shat you on you for that stupid naruto comment you made.
^^Wrongs don't come right three times in three separate threads.
You are not right period.
To withstand means to be unaffected and undamaged by, according to the same source you are using for your argument(You using the source means you cannot try to discredit the source just because it's being used against you, or you'll discredit your argument as well). Corazon was damaged by the bullets, and by extension, affected by them. Meaning, according to your own sources, he did not withstand them; as withstanding ties into durability, that means this isn't a durability feat.
1. When did we ever argue about Doffy's powers being revealed?
2. We never argued about who has the highest position in the crew(It's obviously Doflamingo), we argued about whether or not Vergo was in the same standing as the Executives who held Seats. You said no, he's just an officer, while every Executive was above him. I said that's not true because the Executives were all called the highest officers, and Vergo was called an Elite Officer, and elite and highest were synonymous. I was later proven correct when it was revealed Vergo was the first Corazon.
3. The only mistake I made in that Naruto argument was that saying Naruto had Yin, when he really had Yang. The rest of my argument, which was that Naruto couldn't have done a Yin-Yang technique because he only possesses one of the two needed components for Yin-Yang Release was still correct.
