Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis

[TwoCultSurvivor]

I work in courts all the time. I cover them for a major metropolitan newspaper.
From a court of law perspective, no, you cannot prove that Jesus existed as a figure in history.

Certainly not "beyond a reasonable doubt," and likely not "by a preponderance of the evidence."

Courts do not allow "hearsay" testimony, and ALL the evidence about Jesus' historical existence is hearsay.
I'm including Tacitus, for whom Jesus was a throwaway line in a comment about a different subject entirely.

I'm including Josephus, whose most famous reference to Jesus is a fraud and whose second-most famous reference is incongruous with the legend we're discussing.

I'm not saying Jesus never existed. I think it's likely he did: but the evidence requires us to accept second, third and fourth hand accounts as reliable.

That can happen in history.

It cannot happen in court. There's more proof that the South American caravan has Middle Eastern lepers headed to the USA than there is that Jesus existed, as far as courts would be concerned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin_trial_of_Jesus

I did not say an american court did I? At Christ's trial the court (The only suitable court that could be used to judge him) ordered him executed because they recognised him as the Son of God.. But because they had not power to execute him (the priest took him to the roman authority) Pilate point blanked asked him if he was who the claimed and Jesus said I am but my kingdom is not of this world.. Pilate then responded I can find no fault with this man...

---

I did not realize theists were welcome on this site.

Not that I'm complaining. I just didn't know the ground rules.

Thanks for being here and being willing to "dialogue," if that's the right word for it.

honest question=honest answer.

foolish challenge/gottcha questions= me being put on your ignore list.

Hey, pal, could you hold that goalpost still? Because it's hard to work when you keep moving them.

You talked originally of whether Jesus' existence could be proved from a "court point of view." That was what I responded to. You then argued that the only thing that matters is the court that ordered his execution. Well, duh. obviously the court that ordered his execution believed he existed, just like the gunman that shot Spider-Man's uncle believed Spider-Man's uncle existed. The problem is there is precious little evidence that either incident (Jesus' condemnation and the murder of Spider-Man's uncle) ever actually happened.

You can't use Jesus' execution as proof of Jesus' execution. That is circular reasoning. It is begging the question. 

There is no evidence Pilate ordered Jesus' execution outside the second-hand reports of historians whose only evidence was the testimony of Christians who lived decades after the alleged events happened The truth that Plate's habits were grossly misrepresented (he NEVER released prisoners out of respect for Passover) are a strong indication that the entire story is a fabrication. 

It may well be that Pilate ordered Jesus' execution. But beyond a reasonable doubt? Hardly. By a preponderance of the evidence? Not really.

At BEST, it fits with what we know about the timeline and what Pilate would have done to a man who called himself King in 30AD or so.

Decide for yourself if that's enough evidence, but using the gospel to prove the gospel i kind of dunderheaded. I could prove the authenticity of the Koran using the same standard, if you would stand for it.