20 Mar 06
Something I heard yesterday in our Sunday morning service in the church...
Apparently, some guy in America is taking the Big Guys in Christianity to COURT to prove that God/Jesus does not exist. Who is gonna be the judge, and if he beliefs or doesnt believe in God, what will the verdict be? Who will the judge favour? Americans, making and watching toooo much movies.
My personal opinion is that this guy is going to waste alot of time, in very much his own!
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by NicolaasThere must be more to it than that. What is he actually suing them for? I doubt it will even make it into court though.
Something I heard yesterday in our Sunday morning service in the church...
Apparently, some guy in America is taking the Big Guys in Christianity to COURT to prove that God/Jesus does not exist. Who is gonna be the judge, and if he beliefs or doesnt believe in God, what will the verdict be? Who will the judge favour? Americans, making and watching toooo ...[text shortened]... .
My personal opinion is that this guy is going to waste alot of time, in very much his own!
21 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Nicolaashttp://www.luigicascioli.it/home_eng.php
That is the way I also feel. No one can prove God's non existance. No one, not even the Americans 😉
It's already before an Italian court, Nic. While you are correct, it may not be possible to prove 'god' doesn't exist, it certainly may be possible to show that Jesus was created from whole cloth. The weakness there is the Christian claim of his actual historic existence.
That, of course, will burst the Christian bubble quite nicely.
edit: Looks like his case was tossed.
http://www.luigicascioli.it/comunicato1_eng.php
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAre you unable to be cryptic and unclear?
Do you think being cryptic makes you seem profound and wise?
Is you is, or is you ain't?
The concise post was in response to (another) ridiculous comparison by (another) ridiculous scoffer, this time "asking" why a kumquat shouldn't be given consideration as God.
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWell maybe sometime, somewhere, some society worshipped the comquat. Doesn't make its claim any more invalid than christians, muslims and jews worshipping an, how should I put this?, extremely inactive god. Would be the same thing IMHO.
[b] Are you unable to be cryptic and unclear?
Is you is, or is you ain't?
The concise post was in response to (another) ridiculous comparison by (another) ridiculous scoffer, this time "asking" why a kumquat shouldn't be given consideration as God.[/b]
21 Mar 06
Originally posted by NicolaasBreach of promise regarding an afterlife presumably, unless there is some more specific grievance against a particular church. As it's a civil case it would go on balance of probability, rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt, which from an agnostic point of view is quite an entertaining proposition. Sadly I doubt he'll get very far as he'll have to establish a material loss in order to have anything to sue for, and the only way he could do that would be if God did exist but the church was deliberately telling people to do the wrong things in order to reduce overcrowding in heaven...
I dont know what he is suing them for, it would be interesting to know. I wish I had asked more questions... damn!
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by NicolaasMy personal opinion is that this is so vague as to be nearly meaningless. What are you talking about? Got a link to a news story about it? How do you know your "source" didn't just make this up? Is this the way you get informed about the world? No wonder you believe in magic.
Something I heard yesterday in our Sunday morning service in the church...
Apparently, some guy in America is taking the Big Guys in Christianity to COURT to prove that God/Jesus does not exist. Who is gonna be the judge, and if he beliefs or doesnt believe in God, what will the verdict be? Who will the judge favour? Americans, making and watching toooo ...[text shortened]... .
My personal opinion is that this guy is going to waste alot of time, in very much his own!
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe kumquat post was no less ridiculous than Christianity in my opinion. I still have no idea what your post was supposed to mean.
[b] Are you unable to be cryptic and unclear?
Is you is, or is you ain't?
The concise post was in response to (another) ridiculous comparison by (another) ridiculous scoffer, this time "asking" why a kumquat shouldn't be given consideration as God.[/b]
23 Mar 06
The European tradition (Italy) may spend some time looking at this, but I would expect the common law system (USA) to throw this out unless he has something more concrete for the court to determine, and to which the existence of God is relevant.
Chances are the court will bend over backwards to decide the case on technical or legal interpretation grounds that have absolutely nothing to do with the 'agenda' of the case. And I say, good on them. Where did Americans get this idea that the law is the right tool for every dispute?
23 Mar 06
Originally posted by DeepThoughthttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000APL78O/qid=1143080723/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-3783495-9308931?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=130
Breach of promise regarding an afterlife presumably, unless there is some more specific grievance against a particular church. As it's a civil case it would go on balance of probability, rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt, which from an agnostic point of view is quite an entertaining proposition. Sadly I doubt he'll get very far as he'll have to ...[text shortened]... liberately telling people to do the wrong things in order to reduce overcrowding in heaven...
Been there, done that. Yawn.