Yes there is certainly no evidence of biblical Jesus of the bible which is extremely improbable.
But the furthest you can go with the supernatural Jesus AND - just Jesus as a man - and anything for that matter - is extremely extremely extremely (as many extremelies as you want, on into infinity indeed) improbable. Almost certainly does not exist.
It is a logical fallacy to say Jesus; or anything can have the existence of it disproved. Negative proof is a logical fallacy.
This does not mean you have to believe Jesus of course! You need evidence FOR something to believe it logically. Not AGAINST it.
The lack of evidence and all the contradictions can make things very improbable indeed. But by no known means can science absolutely disprove anything.
You said a truth that science does not claim absolutes - unlike religion.
But if anything - I think even MORE so, - science doesn't claim absolute DISprove.
Either absolute disprove and absolute proof are kind of on the same even footing - as something science does NOT claim. Or if anything I think - absolute DISprove would be MORE absurd to claim.
Like I said - it is a logical fallacy to prove a negative.
Since with claiming absolute proof of a POSITIVE - I think that science just cannot do that. Because some new info could always come in. It always has. How can we know?
But negative proof is a logical fallacy. However improbable somthing is or few evidence there is of that something - you cannot PROVE its NON-existence by any so far KNOWN means - AT LEAST.
EvF
But the furthest you can go with the supernatural Jesus AND - just Jesus as a man - and anything for that matter - is extremely extremely extremely (as many extremelies as you want, on into infinity indeed) improbable. Almost certainly does not exist.
It is a logical fallacy to say Jesus; or anything can have the existence of it disproved. Negative proof is a logical fallacy.
This does not mean you have to believe Jesus of course! You need evidence FOR something to believe it logically. Not AGAINST it.
The lack of evidence and all the contradictions can make things very improbable indeed. But by no known means can science absolutely disprove anything.
You said a truth that science does not claim absolutes - unlike religion.
But if anything - I think even MORE so, - science doesn't claim absolute DISprove.
Either absolute disprove and absolute proof are kind of on the same even footing - as something science does NOT claim. Or if anything I think - absolute DISprove would be MORE absurd to claim.
Like I said - it is a logical fallacy to prove a negative.
Since with claiming absolute proof of a POSITIVE - I think that science just cannot do that. Because some new info could always come in. It always has. How can we know?
But negative proof is a logical fallacy. However improbable somthing is or few evidence there is of that something - you cannot PROVE its NON-existence by any so far KNOWN means - AT LEAST.
EvF
