Italy judge considers Jesus case

[emad]

An Italian court has begun the task of deciding whether a priest should be called to face questioning over whether or not Jesus Christ actually existed.

A court in the town of Viterbo, north of Rome, is considering a case brought by Luigi Cascioli, a devoted atheist.

Mr Cascioli sued Father Righi in 2002 after the priest attacked him in print for casting doubt over the legitimacy of the Christian gospels.

The atheist contends that Christianity relies on purely anecdotal evidence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4653200.stm

[papau]

1. paraphrased: If Cascioli doesn't see sun that millions see, he can't sue

those that see.


As in the article:

"The priest has countered that millions around the world have long believed in the evidence of the Gospels as well as thousands of other religious and secular writings.

"If Cascioli does not see the sun in the sky at midday, he cannot sue me because I see it and he does not," he has said.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. See a sun that casts no light, generates no heat, ....

and it otherwise impossible to prove objectively by any known measure.

[papau]

4. However millions see the sun - so what is "proof" in discussions of God?

Seems it is not the same for the atheist as it is for the theist.

Making discussions as to who is correct rather pointless.

:toast:

[SidDithers]

5. But if the priest publicly says the athiest is wrong...

and that Jesus did, in fact, exist, the athiest has every right to say "prove it".

Sid

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Is the atheist suing the priest for fraud?

This is what I implied from reading the rest of the article. I don't know what the Italian definition of "fraud" is, so I wasn't sure. If so, why doesn't he go after the entire church? Or was this a defimation of character suit due to the priest's letter?

If it comes to trial, it will be an interesting one, because the world's religions are based on faith, and not scientific evidence.

[charlie]

6. Seems so

Apparently, Italy has an "abuse of popular credulity" law, which sounds like another name for fraud. He's also filed a charge of "impersonation", since he claims the church substituted the fictional Jesus for an historical anti-Roman insurgent named John of Gamala.