Conquer Club

A Kenyan man has filed suit against Italy and Israel, seeking to have Jesus' 33 conviction for sedition overturned.

“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the International Court of Justice to seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian. “His selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”

As a matter of law, Indidis’ efforts will fail. Indidis tried to bring the case to the High Court of Kenya in 2007, but the court refused to hear it, citing a lack of jurisdiction.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/04/ke ... us-christ/

If there's a wrongful death judgment of $14 million, amortized at 5% interest per year for 2,000 years, the total value of the judgment will be $1.3 billion, according to the amortization calculator - http://bretwhissel.net/cgi-bin/amortize.

Nah, I'd say he got off easy considering he came back from the dead. They should have crucified him again for good measure.

Wasn't it all his Dad's (or his own) plan?Surely we shouldn't interfere with that,it might have implications for the redemption of mankind.Or something.

They found the loose thread that will unravel the space time continuum.

DO NOT pull on that thread.

saxitoxin wrote:A Kenyan man has filed suit against Italy and Israel, seeking to have Jesus' 33 conviction for sedition overturned.

“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the International Court of Justice to seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian. “His selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”

As a matter of law, Indidis’ efforts will fail. Indidis tried to bring the case to the High Court of Kenya in 2007, but the court refused to hear it, citing a lack of jurisdiction.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/04/ke ... us-christ/

I...uh...what's his point? What is the goal here?

Frigidus wrote:Nah, I'd say he got off easy considering he came back from the dead. They should have crucified him again for good measure.

I don't want to agree just yet but I suspect coming back to life is against one or more of the laws in Leviticus.

this should be class action

One of the few points on which most Biblical scholars agree is that Jesus went to his execution knowingly and willingly. Whether you're religious and you believe he died to redeem our sin, or whether you take a secular view and believe that he was the leader of a protest movement who wanted to be martyred as a rallying point for the people, you agree that he went into it with his eyes open.

Even setting aside the thorny question of divine intervention, Jesus had numerous earthly and mortal ways to avoid his fate -- recant and submit, flee the city before his arrest, have his numerous followers rescue him by force, have his followers collect money to bribe his way out, make a deal with the Romans against to Jews or with the Jews against the Romans, or simply put up a real defense at his trial instead of what was essentially a Nolo contendere plea. He chose none of these, because (for a reason you can debate from here to tomorrow) he wanted to be a martyr.

I don't see any reasonable grounds on which to challenge a guilty verdict when the defendant wanted to be condemned.

I've already contacted Jesus's criminal attorneys about a possible civil suit.

thegreekdog wrote:I've already contacted Jesus's criminal attorneys about a possible civil suit.

Meddling in God's Plan without a license? Tsk, tsk!

Dukasaur wrote:
I don't see any reasonable grounds on which to challenge a guilty verdict when the defendant wanted to be condemned.

But he didn't.

Dukasaur wrote:One of the few points on which most Biblical scholars agree is that Jesus went to his execution knowingly and willingly. Whether you're religious and you believe he died to redeem our sin, or whether you take a secular view and believe that he was the leader of a protest movement who wanted to be martyred as a rallying point for the people, you agree that he went into it with his eyes open.

Even setting aside the thorny question of divine intervention, Jesus had numerous earthly and mortal ways to avoid his fate -- recant and submit, flee the city before his arrest, have his numerous followers rescue him by force, have his followers collect money to bribe his way out, make a deal with the Romans against to Jews or with the Jews against the Romans, or simply put up a real defense at his trial instead of what was essentially a Nolo contendere plea. He chose none of these, because (for a reason you can debate from here to tomorrow) he wanted to be a martyr.

I don't see any reasonable grounds on which to challenge a guilty verdict when the defendant wanted to be condemned.

Dude i m sure he could ve thrown fireballs from his hands if he wanted to.

betiko wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:One of the few points on which most Biblical scholars agree is that Jesus went to his execution knowingly and willingly. Whether you're religious and you believe he died to redeem our sin, or whether you take a secular view and believe that he was the leader of a protest movement who wanted to be martyred as a rallying point for the people, you agree that he went into it with his eyes open.

Even setting aside the thorny question of divine intervention, Jesus had numerous earthly and mortal ways to avoid his fate -- recant and submit, flee the city before his arrest, have his numerous followers rescue him by force, have his followers collect money to bribe his way out, make a deal with the Romans against to Jews or with the Jews against the Romans, or simply put up a real defense at his trial instead of what was essentially a Nolo contendere plea. He chose none of these, because (for a reason you can debate from here to tomorrow) he wanted to be a martyr.

I don't see any reasonable grounds on which to challenge a guilty verdict when the defendant wanted to be condemned.

Dude i m sure he could ve thrown fireballs from his hands if he wanted to.

What part of "setting aside the thorny question of divine intervention" defied comprehension?

Dukasaur wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:I've already contacted Jesus's criminal attorneys about a possible civil suit.

Meddling in God's Plan without a license? Tsk, tsk!

I'M LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN HEAVEN AND HELL BITCHES!!!

Dukasaur wrote:I don't see any reasonable grounds on which to challenge a guilty verdict when the defendant wanted to be condemned.

Desire to be found guilty should be irrelevant. Individuals have been known to try to gain a guilty verdict against themselves in order to keep it off of the actually guilty member (usually a family member or loved one, but possibly someone paid off).

thegreekdog wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:I've already contacted Jesus's criminal attorneys about a possible civil suit.

Meddling in God's Plan without a license? Tsk, tsk!

I'M LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN HEAVEN AND HELL BITCHES!!!

yeah but being a tax lawyer in heaven is super easy

"give to caesar what is caesar's and to god what is god's"

there, just saved you 3 years of divine law school.

Who?

saxitoxin wrote:A Kenyan man has filed suit against Italy and Israel, seeking to have Jesus' 33 conviction for sedition overturned.

“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the International Court of Justice to seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian. “His selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”

As a matter of law, Indidis’ efforts will fail. Indidis tried to bring the case to the High Court of Kenya in 2007, but the court refused to hear it, citing a lack of jurisdiction.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/04/ke ... us-christ/

Oh no, indidi.