Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:23 AM
Original message
Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest
Does anybody know whatever happened with this case:

AN ITALIAN judge has ordered a priest to appear in court this month to prove that Jesus Christ existed.

The case against Father Enrico Righi has been brought in the town of Viterbo, north of Rome, by Luigi Cascioli, a retired agronomist who once studied for the priesthood but later became a militant atheist.

Signor Cascioli, author of a book called The Fable of Christ, began legal proceedings against Father Righi three years ago after the priest denounced Signor Cascioli in the parish newsletter for questioning Christ’s historical existence.

Yesterday Gaetano Mautone, a judge in Viterbo, set a preliminary hearing for the end of this month and ordered Father Righi to appear. The judge had earlier refused to take up the case, but was overruled last month by the Court of Appeal, which agreed that Signor Cascioli had a reasonable case for his accusation that Father Righi was “abusing popular credulity”.

Signor Cascioli’s contention — echoed in numerous atheist books and internet sites — is that there was no reliable evidence that Jesus lived and died in 1st-century Palestine apart from the Gospel accounts, which Christians took on faith. There is therefore no basis for Christianity, he claims.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/european_football/article784417.ece
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pierre.Suave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
1. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
...breathe...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. I think he got an extension till when he dies and meets god, then will come back to testify
:rofl: (ahhh I needed a good laugh!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeresyLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
3. Well, I found this.
But it's still not a lot of help.

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

Sounds like a 'hot potato' saga.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
4. if the priest did NOT say back to the judge:
Prove that he doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. Some years back in Atlanta, I think, someone insisted that the face of Jesus
Edited on Sun Jul-20-08 11:37 AM by Old Crusoe
appeared on a billboard in a close-up shot of a forkful of spaghetti.

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/electronic-publications/stay-free/5/jesus.htm

I wasn't there, so I can't really say if the face of Jesus was there or not, or if something that resembled the face of Jesus -- whatever that might have looked like over 2000 years ago -- was in the forkful of pasta.

It might have been. It might not have been.

In any case, the belief that it was is subjective and particular to the person who sees it.

I like spaghetti. Don't get me wrong. I'm not ambivalent about spaghetti. Bring on the Italian sauces and meatballs as big as the Louisiana Purchase, and I'm a happy camper.

I appreciate both the dismissive practicality of the judge and the subjective ecstatic experience of the defendant.

Attributing appearances of messianic figures onto spaghetti, however, requires quite a leap of faith for me, whether it is the image of spaghetti on a Georgia billboard, or actual spaghetti boiling and burbling away in a pot, and very frankly, I don't invest a lot of worry over it. If Jesus' face was on that billboard, fine, it was on the billboard. If it wasn't, that's fine too. When I'm in the mood for spaghetti, I hope it's well-prepared and if it isn't, I'll go home and make some myself. We know how to make reasonably good spaghetti at our house and Jesus is not a motivating factor or an attendant prop, even. We just like the spaghetti.

Thank you, and God Bless America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilyWondr Donating Member (380 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Nice list on wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptions_of_religious_imagery_in_natural_phenomena

"On November 23, 2004, a grilled cheese sandwich that contained the likeness of the Virgin Mary was sold for $28,000 in an eBay auction by Diana Duyser from Hollywood, Florida."



A fool and her money are soon parted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. And worth every damn cent! Thank you for that link.
God, that's an expensive grilled cheese sandwich, isn't it.

I hope it was awfully, awfully good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. The Virgin kind of looks like Madonna there
with some 40's finger waves going on hair-wise.

It's a good look for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuckinthebush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Virgin Mary? Bahhh....that's Cosette!
Edited on Sun Jul-20-08 01:13 PM by Stuckinthebush


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FKA MNChimpH8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. There's an even better punchline in the Wikipedia story
"The pan that was used to make the sandwich was also sold on eBay."

Truly, stupidity and gullibility are our only inexhaustible resources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dems_rightnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
6. Never was tried, thrown out....
.... and Cascioli fined for wasting the Court's time.


http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50890
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KurtNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
7. That judge has seen the last scenes of "Miracle on 34th Street" too many
times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
8. "militant atheist"
Why not "fervent atheist" or "dedicated atheist" or even "vocal atheist".

I hate this language that demonizes his atheism, as if he were some kind of guerilla leader or even (gasp) a "terraist".

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
9. Actually, the very idea of trying to prove the existence of God
is ridiculous on its face and counter to the tenets of Christianity and probably other major religions of the world as well. Belief in God is a matter of faith. Take it as such or don't take it. That's why they call it belief. You can believe anything you want. Proving those beliefs is another matter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Agreed, however
The Judge wasn't asking to prove the existence of God. Rather, after his character was smeared by the priest in a publication, he requested the priest prove that Jesus existed.

For those of us who study this history without any preconceptions know that the Jesus story is plagiarized myth from earlier religions, and, aspects of the Jesus story is ridiculous on its face with respect to reality. For example: It is ridiculous on its face that Ponchus Pilot would get out of bed in the middle of the night to hear a religious complaint from those who were the conquered by the Romans.

Then even more ridiculous is the idea that Ponchus Pilot would let go free a known killer and terrorist against the Romans in exchange for someone who's only offense was to religiously offend those who the Romans had conquered.

Anyway, I digress. Asking to prove God's existence vs. asking to prove Jesus' existence is two different things.


;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. Agreed. Neither did he ask him to prove Jesus was the "Son of God",
He only asked him to prove that Jesus was a historical figure: whether divine or mortal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. If I remember right
it was tossed out with some finality after being quashed and resurrected 3-4 times. Really, what Italian judge would want to put himself in the position of having to rule based on the (a)historicity of Jesus? Not an enviable job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. You know that separation of church and state thingy?
I think those Italians need to try it. This issue should be fought by the principals in a nice secularly neutral and non-government debating hall. That judge should have thrown that lawsuit out as not having merit. This is the same as proving fairies exist or don't exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-08 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Hi Cleita
Good to see you.

While I agree with you for the most part. However (and I think this is the first time ever), in this case I disagree with you only because the priest opened himself up for this when he publicly smeared the Judge in a publication citing the Judges beliefs - or disbeliefs.

Nevertheless, either way its looked at this is a silly case.



Its always nice to see you Cleita.. :hi:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC