Jesus on Trial

Who's next on his hit list? Mother Nature? How about the Man in the Moon?

I don't understand what the court case IS. What law has been breached that would allow someone to bring suit? If someone thinks Ramses II lived during a different time period than someone else says, or never existed at all, they would publish materials on the subject. A lawsuit over the matter would never reach the courts at all, because there is no LAW in question. What the heck? Am I missing something?

The laws he is considering are "abuse of popular belief" (protecting the public from being conned) and "personation".
The atheist in question states that Jesus is a character based on a 1st century Jewish soldier...

The onus is on the priest to provide "proof of existence".

I think this case may have more merit than the sex-phone operator in Texas that sued her employer for contacting carpal tunnel syndrome via her job...

In any event, it sounds like a film in the making...

I think it sounds like a waste of tax dollars. At least its not out of my pocket this time.

I can't believe they are letting this go forward. I think I'd like to sue Julius Caesar... yeah.. that would be fun. Or maybe I could sue Cupid!

Cascioli (the atheist) wrote a letter to this priest (his chum from seminary school) stating he will withdraw his lawsuit if the priest can supply him with one physical piece of proof that Jesus existed as he is put forward by the RC church.

It sounds like somebody is looking for his "fifteen minutes of fame"!

This is so offensive on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin. It reminds me of our homegrown fruitcake Michael Newdow who just HAS to file lawsuit after lawsuit because he doesnt believe what 92% of the rest of the country believes (in a higher power). The crack pot in this article just has to make sure that everybody believes what he believes. This is known as the tyranny of the minority. The sad part is that all he does with this type of pathetic lawsuit is enrage people, and test the limits of tolerance of people with his minority view. If I met this individual he would hear many 4 letter words about what I think of him and what he is doing. This makes me angry.

I have no words for something like this...except..what is he thinking??

You know, I'd love to respond to this thread, but to be honest I'm a little afraid to.
It's because of responses such as some posted here that people with my beliefs are afraid to say anything.

Although I must say...I always thought the "Christian thing to do" was always to love everyone and to turn the other cheek, rather the respond with ridicule for those who don't hold your views. Somehow I doubt that Jesus (a truely enligtened individual) would approve.

I've just been sitting here imagining the trial......

And in my reverie Jesus shows up w/ his lawyer and makes this guy look like an idiot....

I'm not catholic......but i do believe that belief creats truth.....if millions of people believe Jesus was real thats enough proof for me!!!!...

hahahahahhaa love that.

With all due respect I doubt Jesus would sue someone that did not believe as he did. It seems this litigant should be turning the other cheek. It is he that has the problem with others, not the other way around. I am NOT a Christian, but I respect other people's beliefs. I am not on a crusade to force my beliefs down the throats of other people, as is the person that is featured in the article. If you are an atheist, that's fine with me. I just think it is the epitome of rudeness and intolerance to try to pursuade other people, particularly through a lawsuit, that God doesnt exist. If people want to believe in God, that's their business. This person is the one who is out of line, not the people that believe in Jesus as their God.

I will happily ridicule this idiot just as I did that lady who made up the Wendy's finger incident, or the lady who spilled hot coffee on her lap, or the people who sue fast food restaurants. I cannot support people with their stupid law suits. It's a disgrace to the criminal justice system. He should join an athiests group or something, protest the 10 commandments or whatever- he should just do something rather than wasting his governments money and time with an idiotic lawsuit.

Not to worry, my friends. This guy won't live forever, and when his time comes, God will hold a little trial of his own. And no doubt the athiest will wish he had a little more time to rethink his belief system. Of course, he does still have time, if he starts soon enough.

Jeepers, get a life! What a waste of valuable time, money and resources. Jeesh! Idiot...

And besides, your relationship with God has nothing to do with a court-based decision, and even if the courts ruled in his favour (which I doubt) it is going to make no impact whatsoever on the billions of people around the world who have their own personal beliefs and values.

For some reason, I envision that God standing there in a 50's leather jacket, avec cigarette dangling from mouth, slapping a bat against his thigh, flanked on either side by Santa and the easter bunny ....saying "you been talkin' about me?"....

This suit is really foolish, and a waste of time. This is a matter for historians to discuss through the publication of research, not for someone to sue a religious group or person over. The law in question is also foolish-they should have realized that it would lead to things like this. Someone could sue a large department store for spreading the Santa myth and making their child want toys. Or, even better, a dumped girlfriend could sue the boyfriend who dumped her for emotional distress, because "He told me we'd be together forever-n-ever!". *snort* However, when it comes to the law I think that its purpose was to allow suit to be brought against people who took someone in with a lie and actually BELIEVED it was a lie when they said it. Well, whatever you think about the evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed, you can't honestly say that the Catholic Church believes they are selling people a lie in order to get donations.

I feel strongly that this can't be compared to the Nedow case, however. Nedow is suing over what he honestly feels is the promotion of a religion by government organizations, which if he is correct in his assertion, is clearly not OK. This guy in Italy, though, is essentially suing just because the religion EXISTS. It isn't like his kid was in a history class in a public school where the teacher said that Jesus of Nazareth existed at such-and-such time and is the Son of God. No, someone in CHURCH said it, where it is totally voluntary to go and believe or stay away and not believe. I'd say this guy has a GIANT chip on his shoulder, and just needs everyone to believe what he does in order to feel comfortable with his choice.

Plain and simple: The dude is BORED.

Bored with life, bored with breathing, bored with everything apparently. Bored.

He needs to go lay on the grass & watch clouds go by and pick out shapes or something. Go rake leaves. Anything.

Yeah, right. Plenty of others with a whole lot more muscle than this guy has have been trying for two millennia without any success. He doesn't have a hope in..., well, er, you-know-where.

I'll admit. I'm an aethiest but I absolutely believe in the existance of Jesus Christ. It is very clear that there was a prophetic leader during that time. I'm a fan of those teachings, as they laid out a great way to carry you thru life. An aethiest's debate is about the presence of a surpreme being, not a physical person. If this person understood aethiesm, he'd be fighting about the presence of God, not Jesus.

Sounds like a great big waste of taxpayer dollars to me.

Except that, according to Christians, Jesus is God ... that's the claim he made for himself, anyway, which his followers believed and taught.

I was raised as a Christian, and the lessons that I was taught was that Jesus was the son of God, not actually God. If there are sects that teach it otherwise, then I'll admit ignorance and admit fault.

Just to take one example of several, in John 10:30 Jesus says, "I and the Father are one." The commentary in the NIV study Bible says that the Greek word for "one" indicates "one in essence or nature." So essentially Jesus claims to be the same as God, or since there is only one God, he is God.

In John 8:58 Jesus says "before Abraham was born, I am." The Jews understand that only God says "I am," which implies without beginning and without end.

In John 6:35 he said "I came down from heaven." Which the Jews of the day considered blashphemy as he's claiming divine origin.

In John 14:9 he said "anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." Again, identifying himself with God.

An early Christian creed (the Nicene Creed - 325 AD) identifies Jesus as So apparently this was something the early church also taught, before it divided into "sects."

I'm certainly no authority, but that is what it says. Everyone's free to judge for themselves.

(and besides, it's probably way too far off-topic, anyway)

Yeah no kidding

I'm just affirming that Coaster is right on about the Holy Trinity. If anyone gets bored and happens to be a giant nerd such as myself they can read all about it here-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque_clause

Momofmany, were you raised Orthodox by chance?

No, it was a generic, non-denominational protestant christian church. It didn't have strong opinions on any matters that differentiate most sects. If they pushed anything, it was around living the golden rule (walk the talk) and it didn't place humans above any other species (we're all in this together). Probably why I accept 4-leggeds as my equals in their own unique capacity. Also probably why I could embrace aethism so easily - they also didn't push a "god-almighty" concept. I can follow their religion without believing in a supreme power.