Catholic Church get's sued over existence of Christ

In Italy they can sue the church for their millenia old con over people. That is the coolest thing I've seen in a while.
This is awesome!

link CNN - link

I wonder if I get any reparations for being deceaved when I was small. :idea2:

Heh, that's kinda funny. There's a sort of surreal Monty Python feel to it. Although I can understand why that old priest might be a little frustrated...

Gotta hand it to that Gascioli fellow, though - I'm pretty sure most people of that age don't go and do something as radical. Heck, most of the people half my age don't, despite all the talk.

'obscurantism'. gotta remember that one.

I never thought it was a question of whether he existed or not. Isnt he in Roman redords as being crucified?

Here is a case for the defense. :book:

Honestly, this lawsuit is utterly ridiculous. There is no way that the prosecution will be able to establish the non-existence of Jesus. It makes me wonder why the judge hasn't dismissed this nonsense already. :confused:

He probably needs to go through a fair few formalities first, especially as the old codger pulls appeals. Heck, the old bugger himself thinks his odds to win are about zilch.

I did say it was surreal, didn't I ? :dizzy2:

On the other hand, assuming that Gascioli character isn't a real loon, hasn't gone senile or just decided to have a bit of a laugh at his countrymens' expense (everyone needs a hobby...) odds are he's really just making a polemical statement in the guise of a court case.

I can see why the whole thing would bug the living daylights out of the poor judge too, though.

Regardless of what the outcome is he can be like the Rosa Parks for us atheists. By attacking the Catholic church so openly he has opened a pandora's box that will only escalate as later generations become increasingly aware of the truth.

:book:
:book:
:book:
:inquisitive:
...no, I still can't tell if that statement was serious or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

Regardless of what the outcome is he can be like the Rosa Parks for us atheists. By attacking the Catholic church so openly he has opened a pandora's box that will only escalate as later generations become increasingly aware of the truth.

---

Rosa Parks for atheists? What are you smoking? :dizzy2:

A Rosa Park for atheists would be someone who helps atheists become Cardinals...

Rosa Who, anyway ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Rosa Who, anyway ?

---

A "civil right activist" whose one simple action of defying the segregation provoked the whole Civil Rights movement. (She actually confessed she was tired rather than spirited when that momentous event happened, and that's why she didn't move from the white section of a public bus when the police demanded that she move.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

A Rosa Park for atheists would be someone who helps atheists become Cardinals...

---

That happens everyday in MTW. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Here is a case for the defense. :book:

Honestly, this lawsuit is utterly ridiculous. There is no way that the prosecution will be able to establish the non-existence of Jesus. It makes me wonder why the judge hasn't dismissed this nonsense already. :confused:

---

He has tried, apparently;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Article

The judge presiding over the hearing has tried, repeatedly, to dismiss the case -- prompting appeals from Cascioli.

---

Crazed Rabbit

Awesome. That's the silliest thing I've heard all day.

Is this where I'm supposed to flame BP for attacking christianity?

Just want to make sure I get though the hoop like a good doggie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

Regardless of what the outcome is he can be like the Rosa Parks for us atheists. By attacking the Catholic church so openly he has opened a pandora's box that will only escalate as later generations become increasingly aware of the truth.

---

I see......:juggle2:

There is some independent evidence that Joshua (whom we refer to by the Greek "Jesus", for reasons I don't really understand) was a real, historical figure. I don't think they can go proving he didn't exist. Impossible to prove a negative and all of that.

Otherwise, I think this is very funny. Like Watchman said, it sounds like something straight out of Monty Python. If they want to tie up their courts with ridiculous lawsuits, well, who are we to judge? We gave the world the McDonald's coffee spilling lawsuit, the finger in the chili lawsuit, the ... oh, there are too many to mention by name.

haven't you people ever seen the Jesus scene off of Family Guy: Stewie: The Untold Story? funny stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strike for the south

I never thought it was a question of whether he existed or not. Isnt he in Roman redords as being crucified?

---

IIRC No. No record that Pontius Pilate existed. No record of a census. How peculiar. :inquisitive:

I always thought it was pretty certain that Jesus did exist as a religous leader of the christian faith, however the miracles/actions he performed were questionable, not his existance itself?

extremely funny though,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

IIRC No. No record that Pontius Pilate existed. No record of a census. How peculiar. :inquisitive:

---

Read my link, it would contradict that statement. Also, for further reading, you can refer to the citations list at the bottom of the article. :wink:

Can any form of law or jurisdiction in Italy be taken seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

I always thought it was pretty certain that Jesus did exist as a religous leader of the christian faith, however the miracles/actions he performed were questionable, not his existance itself?

---

Reminds me to read Behold The Man by Michael Moorcock again. Classic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by article

"In my book, 'The Fable of Christ,' I present proof Jesus did not exist as a historic figure. He must now refute this by showing proof of Christ's existence," Cascioli said.

---

So now the time of courts is wasted for this kind of discussions?

I guess Italian taxpayers are really glad that they have to pay to promote Cascioli's book...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strike for the south

I never thought it was a question of whether he existed or not. Isnt he in Roman redords as being crucified?

---

There is no reliable, independent evidence for JC's existence, certainly no official Roman records.
Pontius Pilate did exist, and he is a ruthless and rapacious procurator of Judaea in Josephus, not the kindly person of the NT. If the execution of a JC did happen, then crucifixion was the Roman punishment for JC's crimes (for insurrection - claiming he was the annointed one i.e. Christ/Messiah, the king of the Jews), and Pilate would certainly have punished him like this with no hesitation. The Jewish punishment was stoning for such blasephemy, yet they were blamed.
There was no census as stated in the New Testament.
The 'gospels' were anonymous documents written long after JC supposedly died. The names were added much later.
The earliest records accepted by scholars are the first few letters of Paul which make no mention of a living JC, the 'Christ' being treated symbolically. Most of his later letters are forgeries, probably of C2 AD to combat heresy and gnostic ideas. This makes them internally contradictory as a body of evidence because the earlier letters are clearly influenced by gnosticism.

You really need faith to be a Christian, so the core moral message of the NT (whatever that is, as it can be contradictory) should be a Christian's guide, not the unreliable fairy tales it contains.

Hilarious!
Two questions:
1. Is the Vatican, as an autonomous state, subject to Italian Law?
2. Do you think after the judge's ruling the case will be settled once and for all?

~:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

2. Do you think after the judge's ruling the case will be settled once and for all?

---

If he decides in favour of Cascioli, somebody will probably drop by to officially confiscate our Bible... but perhaps we can keep it if we blacken all references to "Jesus" :inquisitive:

I thought that was really funny. Whatever the judge decides it is going to be funny just reading the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ser Clegane

If he decides in favour of Cascioli, somebody will probably drop by to officially confiscate our Bible... but perhaps we can keep it if we blacken all references to "Jesus" :inquisitive:

---

With all that black the New Testament would look like a CIA document. ~;)
But seriously, what's the Vatican's position on this?
A civil judge judging a transcendental matter? This is absurd.
Who gives him authority to judge about this dispute?
:dizzy2:

It makes you wonder, what happened to the romans that made them stupid.

Some scholars claim leab plumbing. 'Course, about the only thing the ancient Latins and modern Italians have in common is the address anyway. Different peoples, same geography.

AFAIK Vatican is a fully sovereign independent nation quite separate from the state of Italy, so obviously it is unlikely to be directly involved in a purely Italian legal case. Most nation-states are going to get very irritated if a foreign sovereign power tries to meddle in their internal legislations anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

With all that black the New Testament would look like a CIA document. ~;)
But seriously, what's the Vatican's position on this?
A civil judge judging a transcendental matter? This is absurd.
Who gives him authority to judge about this dispute?
:dizzy2:

---

Why is it absurd? are you saying that if I say there is no God and the Bible is wrong that it should be judged by a member of the Church?

Courts are a place for evidence, not faith.