Prove Jesus Christ exists, judge orders priest
 

The Times January 03, 2006

Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest
From Richard Owen in Rome

AN ITALIAN judge has ordered a priest to appear in court this month to prove that Jesus Christ existed.

The case against Father Enrico Righi has been brought in the town of Viterbo, north of Rome, by Luigi Cascioli, a retired agronomist who once studied for the priesthood but later became a militant atheist.

Signor Cascioli, author of a book called The Fable of Christ, began legal proceedings against Father Righi three years ago after the priest denounced Signor Cascioli in the parish newsletter for questioning Christ’s historical existence.

Yesterday Gaetano Mautone, a judge in Viterbo, set a preliminary hearing for the end of this month and ordered Father Righi to appear. The judge had earlier refused to take up the case, but was overruled last month by the Court of Appeal, which agreed that Signor Cascioli had a reasonable case for his accusation that Father Righi was “abusing popular credulity”.

Signor Cascioli’s contention — echoed in numerous atheist books and internet sites — is that there was no reliable evidence that Jesus lived and died in 1st-century Palestine apart from the Gospel accounts, which Christians took on faith. There is therefore no basis for Christianity, he claims.

Signor Cascioli’s one-man campaign came to a head at a court hearing last April when he lodged his accusations of “abuse of popular credulity” and “impersonation”, both offences under the Italian penal code. He argued that all claims for the existence of Jesus from sources other than the Bible stem from authors who lived “after the time of the hypothetical Jesus” and were therefore not reliable witnesses.

Signor Cascioli maintains that early Christian writers confused Jesus with John of Gamala, an anti-Roman Jewish insurgent in 1st-century Palestine. Church authorities were therefore guilty of “substitution of persons”.

The Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius mention a “Christus” or “Chrestus”, but were writing “well after the life of the purported Jesus” and were relying on hearsay.

Father Righi said there was overwhelming testimony to Christ’s existence in religious and secular texts. Millions had in any case believed in Christ as both man and Son of God for 2,000 years.

“If Cascioli does not see the sun in the sky at midday, he cannot sue me because I see it and he does not,” Father Righi said.

Signor Cascioli said that the Gospels themselves were full of inconsistencies and did not agree on the names of the 12 apostles. He said that he would withdraw his legal action if Father Righi came up with irrefutable proof of Christ’s existence by the end of the month.

The Vatican has so far declined to comment.

:laughing:

Wow.

Some people are ridiculous.

That's just...wow. What AITA said.

oh gosh. this should prove a crushing blow to atheism!

I doubt it. It's just about impossible to prove beyond all deniable doubt that someone existed that long ago.

Caesar?

Cleopatra too, for that matter...

It's possible that they are Mythological characters (they're certainly treated like them to an extent). I wouldn't be willing to 100% say they are real. 99.9999% maybe, but not 100.

Or Christianity...


Not that it will a blind bit of difference to either.

it was semi-sarcastic.

Despite the masses and masses of evidence to support their existence? Far, far more than has ever been uncovered to suggest a Jesus Christ ever lived?

To be technical, there is (apparently) more resources suggesting the existence of Jesus than Julius Caeser. Wanna prove he existed? Build a time machine.

To scientifically prove that yes.

Can we prove that Lincoln was president? Not scientifically. Historical evidence would suggest evidence.

I believe that there is more than enough evidence to say that Jesus bar Joseph was a Jewish carpenter from Nazareth/Bethlehem

historical evidence has proven that cleopatra exists. as for the topic of this thread, it's absolutely rediculous. I'm by no means religious, and even I think that it's completely over the top. the whole thing is just pathetic.

They expect a priest to magically conjur up compelling evidence on such a subject that has kept researchers and what not losing hair for the last 2000 years.

Fantastic. ****ing morons.

A month? That's like finding the cure for cancer, so easy.

Well no, its not that hard to prove he existed. If they took DNA from the shroud of Torin (sp?) they could I guess, but whats really difficult to say is to who the DNA actually belonged to.

If the defendant cannot prove it wasn't jesuses, who's to say? Millions of people against a few militant jackasses?

Savior or not, the man existed. Are you telling me they concocted a messiah from some fictional character? Someone had to do something to have stories like that.

Well if you believe in God and Jesus, and you have the bible, you don't need any more proof. That's the point in having faith.

Why would I put my "faith" is something I "hope" exists,
when I can put my trust into something I "know" exists?

Faith certainly is a nice alternative to thinking, isn't it?

Isn't the whole idea behind faith not having to hope something exists, but because you believe it is real?

I wasn't expecting you to understand.

Maybe RAR does.

Oh. I must be too stupid to understand. Cause only smart people can understand this

"So God said "let there be light light" and there was light"

That is just so complex when compared to the scientific explaination of light.
Come on, give me a break

Because I believe something that is not tangible doesn't make me ignorant.

And faith cannot have tangible proof. It defeats the purpose of said faith. People who have faith only need said faith. It's a very personal connection and trying to share why you need no proof to believe something can make you sound very ignorant, which is why I don't say things like that.

but I understand Vanilla. No worries.

and what is this scientific explination?

When something is forced onto you from a young age and enforced by almost everyone you ever talk to, of course a belief like that is going to become something more than a belief. When it becomes so deeply ingrained in your mind it's very hard to even consider any alternatives. Not to mention the fact that the alternative isn't very pretty - religion gives a sense of importance and meaning whereas many see atheism as nihilistic and bleak.

But it's still incredibly naive not to ever question its origins or whether the logic behind it really makes sense.

Oh, and I haven't taken Physics yet or anything, but I'm pretty sure light is the result of electrons dropping in energy thus releasing energy in the form of photons, or light. There's more to it than that, I'm sure, but I don't really feel like going in-depth.

My sentiments exactly

You must think you're too stupid, but I think that you have a really negative attitude towards all religions. From that comment above you have already over-reacted, so how can I expect you to understand the way Christians feel about their faith. I wasn't trying to attack you.

That's about as silly as saying if you believe in santa claus and have a book about him you don't need any further proof he exists.

I don't buy into that for a second

Thank you! Of course you are right, and there is proof, but you have to open your eyes (and mind) to be able to see it.

In any case, regarding the article, I personally have a problem with the laws, considering they are limiting free speech. But, since they do exist, I think the way this guy is going about sueing the priest is pretty funny and if I supported the laws themselves I would probably support his actions.

I never called you ignorant.
I was Vanilla who said "i wouldn't expect you to understand"
Yeah, I'm so fucking stupid because I dont agree with her.

"Faith cannot have tangible proof"

I know that. And many aspects of science do contain tangible proof.
They have proved a variety of things.
I believe that Jesus Christ existed.
Do I belive he was the "Son Of God"....no, I dont.
Is this such a ridiculous thing to believe. I for one think it makes sense that I dont believe it.
Mary was a virgin when Jesus was concived.
That is bullshit
It is not possible for that to happen.
And I know "It was through Divine Intervention"
I can't believe that either. I dont think that I am that much of an idiot because I dont believe that wingded messengers of God came down from heaven and allowed a virgin girl to concieve a child. I know, how dare I.
I am well informed on both sides of the argument belive it or not.
I have read the bibles account of creation.
I have read The Big Bang theory of creation.
I own a copy of The Bible and the Origin Of Species.
I have read Origin of Species, and like many, I havent read all of the bible but through religious studies classes, at school and at church, I think that I have an okay background on the bibles account of the creations of humans.
I am not saying that I am any smarter than you as I am sure that you have the religious and scientific background to back up your arguments just as much as I do.
I cannot completely disprove your claims, you cannot completely disprove mine.

The point isn't that it's impossible to disprove religion, it's that even if you do, it doesn't matter, because they still have their "faith."

No there isnt.
There is proof that Jesus existed, yes, possibly.
Proof that he was the Son Of God....no. No proof whatsoever.
If there was complete proof, then why hasnt Christianity come out with the proof.
Why are there still heated debates on it?
There is no proof, at all, that God exists or that Jesus Christ was the Son Of God

And who are you to tell me what to believe. I doubt you are that godly yourself.
*stumbles across an old thread"
I bet you Jesus would love to hear you say that.
Oh wait, I forgot, you could just go to a preist or pastor, say you are sorry, then go about sucking d*ck as your way of life.
Some people have said that Christianity is a way of life.
I bet the big man is delighted to have his belivers compared to a bunch of "suck c*ck for life-ers"

I'm with you on this one.They have had thousands of years to prove he existed, but have they?No. For the plain fact they cannot nor ever will.

You are personally attacking me now. You are basically saying that I am not good enough to be a Christian, a follower. Now who's playing God? You don't know anything about me, nor I about you, so don't start making assumtions.

You may not believe Jesus is the Son of God but that doesn't mean other people can't.

Oh and finally you admit that there is possible proof.

I just read all of that and do you know something?

Sheep are followers too and people say they are the stupidest creatures for doing so......Makes you think.

When did I ever say I did?

People can work better together in groups.

But I'm sick of arguing this, it's the same thing in so many threads. You guys say what you want.

Maybe its like that in N.C. but here the alternatives are presented everywhere. Every religion on the planet is practiced here and I hear about it every time I get on the trolly.

Faith is telling yourself every day "maybe today a nut job won't try to "logic" me into his religion today"

"well when ya think about it, Alien's did create humanity, I mean <heh> those crop circles just don't pop up from errant lawnmovers, ya know"

"yeah...I know"

"Cause lawnmovers can't jump or anything like that. Pssh, its totally aliens...thats jesus for ya"

Thank (insert creator) for public transit.

Oh, so this is what distracted me from my superb pool shooting game yesterday?!

It said "ROME IS BURNING"

Sounds more like a kindergarten fight when one kid wasn't allowed to join the other kids in the sandbox and pull the girl's hair.