Luigi Cascioli's frivolous lawsuit continues

By -
As most people interested in the historical Jesus are aware, a lawsuit was filed in Italy claiming that the Roman Catholic Church was misleading the public by claiming that Jesus actually existed. The lawsuit was filed by a rather (being charitable) not-particularly-smart individual named Luigi Cascioli whose writings can be found on his website. As I commented previously, his writings show that his work is fraught with errors, and the pleadings and memorandums he has filed in the lawsuit read like a person who is on the verge of inasanity. I am certain it didn't take much time for the judge in the case to decide on his course of action -- dismiss the lawsuit and ask the government to look into the question of whether Sr. Cascioli ought not be prosecuted for a form of malicious prosection.

Well, Sr. Cascioli has now shown an incredible lack of discernment concerning how badly he has been shot down. According to a banner flashing across his website, Sr. Cascioli has filed an appeal in the European Court of Human Rights as of March 18, 2006. He has apparently finally obtained a lawyer who may be able to spin his work to make him look a bit more sane, but I suspect that since all of the papers and pleadings that Sr. Cascioli filed on his own behalf in Italy become part of the record on appeal, the European Court of Human Rights will quickly come to the same conclusions as the Italian judge. A copy of the Application Under Article 34 of the Euopean Convention on Human Rights and Rules 45 and 47 of the Rules of Court can be found on Sr. Cascioli's website. I look forward to the time that the Statement of Facts and Argument which contains the substance of his claims is finally posted so that everyone can see for themselves the lack of substance of this appeal.

Incidentally, it appears that Sr. Cascioli is being a bit disingenuous with the European Court of Human Rights. His Application states

The object of the application is to establish by a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights that the Respondent Government has infringed and is continuing to infringe the Applicant’s rights in breach of Article 6 of the Convention, and to obtain just satisfaction for such breaches, including declaratory relief, and financial reparation for the moral prejudice caused to him, together with the legal costs and expenses incurred herein.

That, however, does not appear to be Sr. Cascioli's motivation at all. I suspect that his motivation is actually three-fold (the first two of which are based on my own speculations about his motivation). First, he is trying to sell his book -- a book that is apparently self-published and is not carried (at least, last time I checked) on any of the major Internet book sites like Amazon.com, barnesandnoble.com or borders.com. Second, he wants to push his atheistic agenda on the rest of society.

Sr. Cascioli's third objective I have discerned from his own admissions -- he simply wants to try to hurt the Roman Catholic Church. In a document on his website which was apparently filed with the court entitled "Comments of Luigi Cascioli about the hearing kept on 27th 22of January", he states (typos included):

Whatever is the decision of the Court of Strasburgo, (knowing the tentacles of the "Great Piovra" even if everything is possible, to thing is certain however: the Church will go out out from there tattered and with the broken bones. and this already me enough to be able to say: "The didn'ts live in vain!".

Let's face it. This is not about proving that Jesus didn't exist. This is not about Sr. Cascioli being denied his rights. This is admittedly about Sr. Cascioli's fall away from the Roman Catholic Church and his efforts to get even! He is like a divorcee who is wanting to hurt his ex-spouse. Ask any divorce attorney and they will tell you that many, many people who are divorced don't think clearly when they are going to court. Against all common sense, their goal is to hurt their former spouse no matter what the cost. They want to argue over nonsense if it will cause their spouse pain. Sr. Cascioli simply wants to hurt the Roman Catholic Church, and he doesn't care if what he says is the truth.

Sad.

Comments

Unknown said…
Luigi you really are insane. Why try to disprove weather Jesus lived or not? What's he done to you? And why does it bother you what other people believe in? No ones telling you what to believe so stop raining on others parade and mind your own business. But just for a second lets just say that when you die and you happen to stand before the person you say did not exist, what are you going to say then, " SORRY I WAS WRONG "!! To late your screwed. Now I can see why you would go sue the Catholic Church since they are the worst people to represent Jesus, you can not hide a bunch of child molestors and homosexuals and believe in Jesus.
3/01/2013 12:13:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Many Children in Bethlehem Did Herod Kill?

By -
A couple of months ago, I wrote a post about the Gospel of Matthew’s account of the slaughter of the innocents. Therein, I argued that some of the skepticism about the account was unjustified. One argument I made was that the number of children killed in Bethlehem would likely have been no more than 20. Though obviously an act of great evil, the killing of 20 children would be much less likely to be noticed by historians of the time than the slaughter of thousands as later traditions speculated. In response to the post, Peter Kirby asked a few questions. He has patiently waited my response, continuously delayed by work, family, and the completion of my Acts article . Two of the questions had to do with how the amount of 20 was determined. Others with the omission of the account by Luke and the reliability of the tradition recounted by Macrobius. Peter also mentioned that there were other reasons to doubt the story's historicity beyond just the silence of other sources. I
Read more

The Bogus Gandhi Quote

By J. P Holding -
Image
I first made this post in 2012, and since then I've made a sort of mini-career out of tracking down bogus quotes like this one (including a video version below). It's a sort of fun microcosm of the way information is mishandled in the Information Age. ** I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. – Mahatma Gandhi A Christian can probably expect to get this quote thrown at them at least once in their lifetime, and waved in their face many more. I had it put to me recently, but my experience with this sort of thing immediately led me to wonder -- is it real? The evidence at this point seems to be no. The first signal of a problem was that anywhere I found it, no source was given. That's often a sign that something is being passed around uncritically. Whether online sources or books, no one seemed to have a source for this quote. A second warning was that the quote has been given more than one context. As
Read more

Where did Jesus say "It is better to give than receive?"

By -
A visitor to the CADRE site recently sent a question about Paul's statement in Acts 20:35 which records Paul as saying, "And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is better to give than to receive'." The reader wanted to know where Jesus said this. This was my answer: You are correct in noting that this saying of Jesus quoted by Paul is not found anywhere in the four Gospels. My own study Bible says "This is a rare instance of a saying of Jesus not found in the canonical Gospels." Does the fact that it isn't stated in the Gospels mean that it isn't reliably from the lips of Jesus? I don't think so. The Apolstle John said at the end of his Gospel (John 21:25): "Jesus did many other things as well.If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." Obviously, this is exaggeration for the sake of making a point, but it means that Jesus
Read more

Discussing Embryonic Stem Cell Research

By -
Stand to Reason has published a list of "talking points" that can be used as a quick reference sheet for answering questions about embryonic stem cell research and why people ought to oppose this procedure. The piece, entitled "Are you against stem cell research and cloning?" give good, concise answers to some of the questions that arise concerning why Christians would oppose this procedure when it supposedly holds such great promise. For example, consider the following from the "talking points": Where do we get human embryonic stem cells? We can only derive human embryonic stem cells by killing a human embryo. Removing its stem cells leaves it with no cells from which to build the organs of its body. What is the embryo? An embryo is a living, whole, human organism (a human being) in the embryonic stage. All the embryo needs to live is a proper environment and adequate nutrition, the very same thing all infants, toddlers, adolescents, and adults need.
Read more

Revamping and New Articles at the CADRE Site

By -
We have changed the Christian History page at the CADRE site from the old design to the new one. The focus of the revamped page has expanded, with many new articles: This page provides links to websites and articles relating to Christian history, including theological development, notable figures, contributions of Christianity to society and culture, and the archaeological evidence for the facts of the Bible. We have also added four new articles by Darin Wood, PhD: John Chrysostum: His Life, Legacy, and Influence Dr. Wood provides an informative sketch of Chrysostum's life, as well as an exploration into his writings and impact on church evangelism. The Righteousness of God in the Pauline Corpus Dr. Wood examines the crucial role that righteousness plays in understanding Paul's perspectives on justification, propitiation, expiation, and covenant. The Structure of the Apocalypse Dr. Wood provides an in-depth analysis of the structure (or structures) behind the Book o
Read more

Tillich, part 2: What does it mean to say "God is Being Itself?"

By -
 In this essay, which is a chapter from the new book I'm now working on, I'm moving toward defining what I think Tillich means exactly by being itself. It's a long journey but an important one. What does Tillich actually mean by “being itself?” Does he mean the same things as other theologians who use the phrase? It’s a mysterious sounding phrase and Tillich never actually comes out and says what he means by it. As I will show there is a reason for this, and I will show what I think that reason in is. In the mean time the task of this chapter is to deduce exactly what Tillich actually means by this phrase. There are three basic possibilities: Three alternatives as to meaning (1) The basic fact that things exist is all that the concept of “God” amounts to. (2) There is a special quality to being, an impersonal aspect” ground of being” or “being itself” and that quality constitutes ‘the divine.’ This possibility excludes God as “king of the universe.” (3) God is b
Read more

A Botched Abortion Shows the Lies of Pro-Choice Proponents

By -
One of the classes I teach at the university is a course on Ethics, and I am using a book by Ralph Dolgoff, Donna Harrington and Frank M. Lowenberg entitled " Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice " as the text. Overall, I think that it is a good Ethics textbook largely because it provides a balanced viewpoint on the need for values in social work. For example, the book makes the argument (without committing to it) that those engaged in social work cannot avoid making value judgments in ethical decisions because trying to do what is right necessarily involves making an value choice. Also, I book notes that some (including me) think it is ethically wrong for a social worker to cover-up her own values when counseling another person because it creates a false (and ultimately unproductive) relationship with the person being counseled. Still, one of the exemplars in the book gave me pause – not because I thought it raised a deep ethical quandary, but because I wondered how
Read more

The Folded Napkin Legend

By J. P Holding -
I wrote about t his "urban legend" a few years ago, but it's typical of the silly urban legends we hear about now and then, such as the idea that the head of Proctor and Gamble went on Oprah to pledge his allegiance to Satanism. Christians are no less gullible for this sort of nonsense than anyone else, and frankly, some seem more gullible to believe anything that they consider "edifying". It's no wonder we're mesmerized by self-comfort tunes like "I Can Only Imagine" that contain about as much useful theology as a thimble. ** The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin.... In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day. The fol
Read more

Exodus 22:18 - Are Followers of God to Kill Witches?

By -
Image
A few days ago I stumbled upon an article published on a website named Haaretz which appears to be a news site for Israeli news. The article entitled " Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live: A Murderous Translation ," discussed the correct understanding of Exodus 22:18. According to the Haaretz article (authored by Elizabeth Sloane), the word "witch" may have been an erroneous translation. And, to read into Ms. Sloane's argument just a bit, the erroneous translation contributed to the deaths of many innocent witches. Specifically, she notes: This quote, found in the King James Version of the Bible, has been widely held responsible for the witch burnings that plagued Europe, and later America, in the Early Modern Period (1450 C.E. – 1750 C.E.). But the murderous practice may have all been the result of a Biblical mistranslation. Now, as I am not an expert on ancient Hebrew, I need to approach translation issues such as this by accessing sources readily
Read more

A Non-Biblical Historian Accepts the Key "Minimum Facts" Supporting Jesus' Resurrection

By -
In their book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus , Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona argue for the historical reality of Jesus' bodily resurrection using the "minimum facts" approach. Rather than get bogged down in inerrancy and other debates, they focus on the key facts demonstrating Jesus' resurrection. For them, the key facts are: *Jesus' death by crucifixion. *Disciples' Beliefs that Jesus Appeared. *Conversion of Paul. *Conversion of James. *Empty Tomb. William L. Craig, another significant apologist for the historical bodily resurrection of Jesus likewise focuses, in his accessible The Son Rises , on the empty tomb and Jesus' resurrection appearance. Craig gives special emphasis to Jesus' honorable burial by Joseph of Arimathea and Jesus' appearances to James and Paul and their subsequent commitment to the Christian cause. Craig, Licona, and Habermas argue that these basic facts are generally supported by most of the relevant sc
Read more