RE: Existence of Jesus
February 21, 2009 at 6:44 pm
(This post was last modified: February 22, 2009 at 4:08 pm by DD_8630.)
(February 21, 2009 at 11:51 am)chatpilot Wrote: EvF I tend to disagree with your conclusion that Jesus cannot be proven to have not existed 100% based on the current available evidence.I agree with EvF here: evidence cannot prove the existence or non-existence of something. We can evidence something and make it more and more likely (or unlikely) to be true, but, short of a logical disproof, anything is possible.
(February 21, 2009 at 11:51 am)chatpilot Wrote: These claims are not negative proofs but in my opinion very positive proofs against the existence of Christ.A suspicious lack of evidence is just that: suspicious. It could simply be bad luck that no contemporary, first-hand, extra-Biblical evidence has survived.
(February 21, 2009 at 11:51 am)chatpilot Wrote: A similar analogy is evident with evolution and natural selection.It is observed in various fields of science and the natural world confirms it.To say that evolution is just a theory would in fact demonstrate the ignorance of the one making such a claim regarding the processes behind evolution.When the answers are so evident and obvious in the natural world around us.Actually, calling it a theory is accurate: it is no more than a theory. The fact that it is overwhelmingly supported by the evidence just means that it is exceedingly probable. No theory can ever be proven, nor be promoted to 'fact'.
"I am a scientist... when I find evidence that my theories are wrong, it is as exciting as if the evidence proved them right." - Stargate: SG1
A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, -- a mere heart of stone. - Charles Darwin
A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, -- a mere heart of stone. - Charles Darwin