The Evidence Required Is?

[Bgood]

Meh.... Christianity is already disproven.... the only minuscule possibility would be some sort of "initial creator" which is for whatever reason unable to interact w/ its creation.... based on all known evidence, there is nothing that indicates such a thing even possible, but either way, Christianity is so hardcore disproven there isn't any amount of proof short of god himself talking to me directly in front of witnesses that would cause me to believe.... and even so, it would be such a corrupt deity that I would be morally obliged not to follow, so the entire quandary is completely is pointless.

I agree with this assertion. It is particularly important when archeologists search for artifacts and manuscripts that prove if Jesus even existed or not. Outside of the plaigerized holy bible, there is scant if any credible evidence for Jesus's existence. The writings of Josephus that mention Christ have been proven as forgeries. (no surprise there). Many artifacts such as the cloak of Turin are proven as hoaxes. So nevermind that there's no evidence for God, there is also no solid evidence for a man named Jesus who did all the magical things that are attributed to him in the gospels.

What I like about Buddha is that I believe in his teaching, his path, his way. I can't entirely say that about Jesus's Way because it has many inconsistencies and mixed messages stained with confusion. Buddha's existence is irrelevant because his teachings definitely exist. Yet I personally think it is likely that a man named Siddhartha probably did live thousands of years ago. At least more likely than Jesus because I think there is more circumstantial evidence in Buddha's case, despite being 500 years earlier.