Two scenarios that may/may not happen.

[Little Rik]

The first, being the guy of "hypothetical situations" which I'm known to family and friends, I wonder if the theory of Evolution was ever "proven" wrong, even though so far barely any of that happened, but considering that science demands that any hypothesis be falsifiable, there is a small chance that the theory of Evolution may be turned upside down, but as I said, this is just a hypothetical situation. So, based on that, does it follow that the creation story in the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) is true? Would your atheism be "shaken" if such far stretching hypothetical situation ever became a reality? And why?

If evolution was proven wrong then defaulting back to something that has no proof would not be a sensible things to do.  It's a bit like asking if you found out that your parents never did give you the Christmas presents you know you had, would you default back to believing in Santa? Of course you wouldn't,  in the same way i doubt anyone other than those already believing would default back to the Judaic history.
 

The second issue regarding Christ's existence.  I'm less enthusiastic to accept the claim that Jesus never existed. A good number of historians agree that he lived, also considering what I learned so far about history at university, we can't be 100% sure, after all, history is subjective. History is based on records from people who have their own agendas and biases, and it is a fact that they chose what or include and not include in their writings, it doesn't follow that something didn't happen or a person didn't exist just because some writings don't include such event or person. Also, there are chances that in the future we may find a good and reliable evidence for people that believed never to have existed. Therefore, it is safe not to be so "sure." What do you think of such argument?

Many would agree there was a teacher a few thousand years ago that started or inspired a religion we now call Christianity, and most would agree that at least some of the people mentioned actually existed.  I'm open to more evidence that some historical happenings mentioned in holy books are actually real places and based on real events.

We are then left with some pretty fantastic supernatural claims around these events which require a great deal more proof. Take for instance Mormonism and it's founder, real places are mentioned, real people are even mentioned (and can be googled) but just because the early account of the Mormon church has provable participants i still don't accept the supernatural claims.  

If we are given to accepting that provable places and people mean that the supernatural is also proven then why not worship say Ram Rahim (an Indian guru recently put in prison) who has 50 million or so followers, who claim that he is unjustly imprisoned. (remind you of anything)

No, the supernatural claims must have evidence that is compelling in it's own right.

There are claims and claims Poss.
They may be all false claims or there could be some real claim among all the false claims.
Who knows?
I keep on telling atheists that they should be very very careful before they make unproven claims but they listen no one.
They keep on telling that the consciousness is a product of the brain, that with the physical death is all over and so many other unproven claims.
What can you do then?
Have you got a machine that stop people from making unproven claims?
Any help?  

Of course the claim about Jesus must be a false claim even if somebody spread his teachings around the known world.
Probably some aliens came on planet earth to spread Christianity.





(color mine)