Existence of Jesus

[Edwardo Piet]

The burden of proof is not restricted to science: it extends to any claim that is not the null-hypothesis (e.g., if I claim there are no fairies, and you claim there are fairies, the burden does not fall on me, since mine is the null).

The Bible is a collection of documents which make a vast number of direct and indirect claims. The Book of Exodus mentions Egypt a fair number of times, which is an indirect claim that Egypt exists (or, at least, existed). Now, it just so happens that Egypt does exist, which adds credence to the associated parts of the Bible.

This is why I don't say "I don't believe in the Bible" or "The Bible is false", because it isn't: there are parts which we know to be true, parts which we know to be false, parts which are plausible, parts which are fantastical, etc. It's also worth pointing out that verifying one claim tells us nothing about the plethora of other claims.

Good post. I know that the burden of proof is not just science. I temporarily forgot - in other words I made an accidental mistake.

Of course its in law, history and many other subjects too.

But the claim of whether Jesus DID or DID not exist or not in the real world - that's a scientific one right?

I dunno I guess that for some reason I thought that since I think its likely that at least ONE thing in there is true (not the supernatural stuff obviously), or a few, lol - that perhaps the whole message of the new testament - Jesus - being an important issue, if any of it is right - its that Jesus existed PERHAPS.

Although - if he DID exist. He obviously had no special powers and isn't a God - rather it would be he has been worshipped as one 'The Jesus' of the bible is just based on a real man who had NO powers and was NOT the son of God (Well I mean duh. That's just silly).

But one again - good post.

Very good post.

I sometimes wonder when there's ever a time when probability can sneak in without evidence and only based on something like intuition. Something FOR SOME REASON seems about a certain probability and you find the evidence later....

Well I have no evidence for that so I have no reason to believe that.

But I keep my options open.

I don't believe without evidence (well, as you can see - I TRY). But I am open to evidence that I don't yet know about! (well at least most of it I hope! Once again - I try.).

Evf