Topic awaiting preservation: Did Jesus exist? Court to decide (Page 2 of 2)

You know, they guy might have a chance, presented the way the article explains it.

This is hardly evidence;

quote:

---

The priest has countered that millions around the world have long believed in the evidence of the Gospels as well as thousands of other religious and secular writings.

---

It seems unilkely the church would be able to bring forward anything more cogent than the above paragraph in their defense.

Believe does not prove fact.

In any event if it goes to trial as a "fraud" case, it will be a media circus like no nother we have seen since Diana died.

I rather hope it does. Could prove very interesting regardless of whether or not Cascioli wins.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

(Edited by Diogenes on 01-27-2006 19:21)

Whatever the outcome, I love to watch "religions" squirm!

Is it so bad to ask that "religions" prove themselves?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Is it so bad to ask that "religions" prove themselves?

---

In a court of law? Yes.

And I hardly think this bit of idiocy is making any part of the 'catholic collective' squirm...

In reality all it does for the vast majority of people is make atheists look like fools. With any luck, it may cause a hadnful of people to reeavaluate their religion....but that may be overly optimistic.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:In a court of law? Yes.

---

Why? If law deals with absolutes, then why not?
Then again, perhaps there is another avenue to ask for such answers?

quote:

---

DL-44 said:And I hardly think this bit of idiocy is making any part of the 'catholic collective' squirm...

---

Oh I'm sure that the "higher catholic collective" is not squirming, but the idea is most assuredly being discussed. It is either being discussed to squash the idea, or it is being discussed to squash the idea.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:In reality all it does for the vast majority of people is make atheists
look like fools. With any luck, it may cause a handful of people to re-evaluate their religion....but that may be overly optimistic.

---

Even if it gets 1 person to question religion, I am all for it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Why? If law deals with absolutes, then why not?

---

1) the fact that law attempts to be absolute is precisely why it cannot be the avenue used to explore religion or ancient history. ancient history is interpretive, as is every religion, even those who claim to be absolute.

2) while law does indeed attempt to deal with absolutes, it never actually succeeds.

3) with the errors constantly made by courts of law, the idea that a court could rule on a matter of subjective ancient history is completely absurd. We can't get it right when passing verdicts on the actions of people that are captured on video, supported by DNA, etc, but a court ruling is supposed to have any sort of bearing on the question of whether a man existed 2,000 years ago?

C'mon...

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Then again, perhaps there is another avenue to ask for such answers?

---

Of course. The scholarly and philosophical communities to which these questions are subjected to daily across the world.

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Even if it gets 1 person to question religion, I am all for it.

---

Normally I might agree. But in this case the negative association that intelligent atheists will be subject to as a result of fools like this guy outweighs any possible positive outcome.

IMO.



(Edited by DL-44 on 02-08-2006 02:43)

quote:

---

Normally I might agree. But in this case the negative association that intelligent atheists will be subject to as a result of fools like this guy outweighs any possible positive outcome.

---

Well said.

WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles

If I may;

FACTS, or the presentation of such FACTS, would surely have been the optimal role, in order to increase one's followers. I don't think that the major reason to expand one's flock of followers, was created by simply asking one to BELIEVE. So, if religious leaders use FACTS to entice people to follow a religion, then should not such leaders be questioned about such FACTS?

quote:

---

DL-44 said:But in this case the negative association that intelligent atheists will be subject to,

---

Huh? So what! Who cares if a, "negative association", exists within the realm of such, "intelligent atheists"!
I prefer the BRUSH FIRE concept, on such religious questions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

quote:

---

then should not such leaders be questioned about such FACTS?

---

Obviously. Nobody has suggested otherwise. Once again I have to ask: your point?

As for the negative association: it is much like decent christians who have to put up with having Pat Roberts be the loudmouth who gets the attention...

People who damage the legitimate side of an argument by being stupid in their use of the argument only hurt the "cause" so to speak.

quote:

---

Zynxthen should not such leaders be questioned about such FACTS?

---

quote:

---

DL-44As for the negative association: it is much like decent christians who have to put up with having Pat Roberts be the loudmouth who gets the attention...People who damage the legitimate side of an argument by being stupid in their use of the argument only hurt the "cause" so to speak.

---

You answer here kinda answers my question above.

I figured that even if we can get such religious leaders to explain their positions on what they preach as facts, it's a good thing. Open up religion and it's leaders to the scrutiny of factual representation within religion. But I see the harm that that can cause others.

I still think that any "damage" created is a loss I would be willing to give, if we could hear the Church, and it's leaders explain their position.

And if the only way to get that done is by some duffiss using the law, then have at it.

Of all the stupid uses people use the courts for, this one might be interesting to hear from the defendants.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

quote:

---

Zynx said:

I still think that any "damage" created is a loss I would be willing to give, if we could hear the Church, and it's leaders explain their position.

And if the only way to get that done is by some duffiss using the law, then have at it.

---

You can hear the church leaders explain their positions over and over and over.

It is, of course, more difficult to get many of them to really dig in and debate the facts in a realistic manner. But, no matter how you slice it, christianity relies on faith as its bottom line. No court ruling, and discussion that would take place in court, would have any effect on that, nor would it bring to light any new information that is not already discussed constantly in the scholarly community at large.

Moving this discussion into court would only restrict, belitle, and nullify any potential conclusions.
After all, it is clear that court rulings are more about who argues better than they are about truth.

quote:

---

After all, it is clear that court rulings are more about who argues better than they are about truth

---

Then the Jesuits will win.

They are slicker and slipperier than a lawyer turned politican, but no more honest.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

it doesn't matter who wins in court. the issue whether Jesus really existed will still remain a mystery to us. so its just a matter of faith. if you believe that He existed, so be it. and if you don't then that's your opinion.

Short Run Printing

quote:

---

mhadxpresion said:

if you believe that He existed, so be it. and if you don't then that's your opinion.

---

The point, of course, is that there is far more to it than simply any given person's "opinion". There are the things on which an opinion is based. Things that *do* very much matter. While these things are too involved for a court of law to be of any use deciphering, they are fairly important, and go beyond simply 'beleiving' whether or not Jesus existed...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/10/italy.christ.ap/index.html


The madness continues,

" Cascioli, a former schoolmate of Righi's, said he had not expected the case to succeed in overwhelmingly Roman Catholic Italy.

"This is not surprising but it doesn't mean it all ends here," he said, adding that he's considering taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

"This is an important case and it deserves to go ahead," he said. "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

sometimes i read through these threads which used to be a great source of discussion, but then often they degenerate into petty bickering....

so maybe the next thread should be "does intellingent conversation within the asylum still exist? this thread will decide"

DL ya right, too many good threads end up digressing, stick to the topic guys and quit bitching.....

ok back to the 3d basement.... where things are almost normal... well sometimes even there bickering happens....

I guess I prefer to push the issue. It conjours up thoughts, that should be discussed, even if they are dumb, stupid, or otherwise.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48551


" Cascioli declares he is not intent on having the matter be decided by a court of law, saying, "I wrote to [Righi] an open letter, stating that I would withdraw the lawsuit if he were capable of supplying proof, just one proof, of the historical existence of Jesus. "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "