Can you prove Christ exists in a court of law? We’ll soon see.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vast
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
AI Thread Summary
An Italian judge has summoned a priest to court to provide evidence of Jesus Christ's existence, following claims by Luigi Cascioli that no reliable historical evidence supports Jesus' life outside of Gospel accounts. Cascioli argues that Christianity lacks a factual basis, while others in the discussion reference historical texts, such as those by Josephus and Tacitus, that mention Jesus. The debate highlights differing views on the distinction between historical evidence and religious belief, with some asserting that the absence of physical remains does not negate the possibility of Jesus' existence. The Vatican has not commented on the case, which raises questions about the intersection of faith and historical inquiry. The outcome of this legal challenge could have significant implications for discussions around the historical Jesus.
  • #51
Scott1 said:
And why did you say this when you think finding his grave means that he doesn't exist?And if they did find his grave there whould go reason why they didn't find his body because the bible says when died his body dispared before he was ressuercted.
I think his point is that it is awefully convenient for them.
They believe that this man existed and did these wonderful things. If they are asked to provide physical evidence that he existed in the form of a body or grave then well they will just show you the last chapter of the story. You see he was transported to heaven wholely after being ressurected from the grave and this was proof that he was the son of god. So their proof that he was the son of god conveniently eradicates the proof that he even existed in the first place.


I found a magic monkey. I knew that he was magic when he vanished without a trace. You believe me don't you?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
TheStatutoryApe said:
I found a magic monkey. I knew that he was magic when he vanished without a trace. You believe me don't you?
I need know more about the monkey frist befor I can belive.Right know I'am not sure since because your saying that because your using it so you can argue with me.
 
  • #53
Vast said:
Maybe this is a sign of the times? Maybe its time organized religions began relinquishing some of their rigidly held ideas. Do you think they can do that? I don’t, and I think it demands a more confronting approach. It’s time we stopped being so sympathetic!
Well there goes our freedom of belief then huh? Time to get confrontational and tell people what is or is not ok to believe in? What a lovely idea.
 
  • #54
scott1 said:
I need know more about the monkey frist befor I can belive.Right know I'am not sure since because your saying that because your using it so you can argue with me.
That's ok. I was being facetious.:smile:
 
  • #55
TheStatutoryApe said:
That's OK. I was being facetious.:smile:
:smile:
I know, sorry for posting a confusing response.I was kind of planing you were going to post something about that monkey doing miracles and stuff but then I was going argue and say why.I think it's not How Jesus did the miracles is why believe in him I think it's why he did those mircales is why people believe in him.
 
  • #56
TheStatutoryApe said:
Well there goes our freedom of belief then huh? Time to get confrontational and tell people what is or is not ok to believe in? What a lovely idea.

You misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying we need to be more critical of Religious organizations and the doctrines they teach. At the moment the Vatican is considering doing away with the idea of limbo. This is an extremely ludicrous idea which only now in 2006 is the church reevaluating this idea. Pope John Paul with some reluctance, accepted the theory of evolution, yet there are cardinals that still oppose it strongly. Don’t you agree that these ideas and beliefs are spoon fed to people, not independently thought up? This is what I’m saying needs to be challenged.
 
  • #57
Most people were born into religion, but there is some reason why they can't walk away from it. Fear perhaps, of punishment either in this life or after, fear of not fitting in. Perhaps it personally gives them a sense of fulfillment to "belong". There is "something" that they are getting out of it. People that don't belong to an organized religion were probably born into a religion, but made the decision that they didn't need to belong. They realized that they didn't need what organized religion is selling. I think most religions sell "salvation" at the very least. -Evo
That includes scientology right :-p ?
 
  • #58
Vast said:
You misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying we need to be more critical of Religious organizations and the doctrines they teach. At the moment the Vatican is considering doing away with the idea of limbo. This is an extremely ludicrous idea which only now in 2006 is the church reevaluating this idea. Pope John Paul with some reluctance, accepted the theory of evolution, yet there are cardinals that still oppose it strongly. Don’t you agree that these ideas and beliefs are spoon fed to people, not independently thought up? This is what I’m saying needs to be challenged.
Most individual's ideas are spoon fed to them instead of independantly thought up, including tried tested scientific ideas.
Essentially you are saying that the these people should not hold certain beliefs and that we ought to do something about it akin to what Cascioli is doing.
Do you really think that people will react well to such an endeavour? Do you really care if you are insulting and disrespecting these people by telling them their beliefs are ludicrous?
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top