There is no scientific basis. It cannot make it past the hypothesis stage. Yet there is also no scientific basis that he did not exist. This is one of those things that unless you have a time machine you will not be able to prove using the scientific method.
A book written and edited by man many times is not science. Even if it wasn't edited by man and was the original, that still has nothing to do with science.
This doesn't mean there is no Jesus, it just means you cannot use science to prove whether there was or was not. Unless you DO happen to have a time machine... that'd be pretty nifty, and scary Time goggles so you couldn't change the past would be preferable. :)
I think I responded to you on this two weeks ago:
In this post about Jesus and the Scientific Method
Take solace though
Science cannot disprove Jesus Christ either.
EDIT: And darn it... wrong monitor again... I prefer poems with this account. I should have posted that on @dwinblood account. :)
Replying to myself from the correct account. I am not against religion. I am not against Jesus Christ. I've been friends with many minsters and priests and had a lot of great conversations.
You are correct that I believe religion and science are trying to answer the same questions.
Religion relies partially on faith and belief.
Science does not. It relies upon observation, hypothesis, tests with controls, documentation, observation, and replication, and it is always subject to be challenged. The scientific method was designed to eliminate bias. That doesn't mean there are not a lot of so called "scientists" today that give science a bad name. There are. They don't actually follow the scientific method so really are not scientists. If you follow the scientific method you right now where you sit would be a scientist. If you had a dozen PhDs saying you had science degrees and you did not use the scientific method then you are no scientist. It's pretty simple.
So could people not using the scientific method tell you science could prove Christ and tell you they are using science? Sure, anyone can do that. If it doesn't use the scientific method it is not science, it is simply someone hijacking the words for their own purpose.
I am not saying you are doing that @gavvet You write some truly compelling pieces, but I do think you are falling into the trap of viewing the term science as some of the charlatans may have convinced you is science.
You can research what the scientific method is. You don't (and shouldn't) take my word for it.
If you can find a way to prove Jesus Christ with the scientific method I would certainly be interested in that as a big part of the scientific method is that the experiment can be replicated.
Yes, and there are just as many "so-called Christians" as "so-called Scientists". So lets set those folks aside as irrelevant.
Science has recused itself from knowing anything about the subject. Fine. That kind of ends the debate right there, doesn't it?
The problem is that some scientists go beyond their domain and claim that if you can't apply the scientific method you can't know anything. That's where they cross the line.
I like to compare the supernovas that scientists believe to have happened to the miracles that Christians believe to have happened. In neither case can we test the proposition all we can do is study past records collected by others for us.
Now we are only quibbling about how many records, how they were documented, and how old they are.
These are differences in degree, not in kind.
If you can't apply the scientific method it is not science.
Science is not a belief system. It is simply a tool. If the tool can't be used then what good is it to pretend that it can be used?
Science can't make stuff out of thin air. Sometimes people use the word science and try to do exactly that, but that isn't science... it's just someone hijacking the label to try to get you to accept their appeal to authority.
There is no appeal to authority built into the scientific method.
Without a time machine all we can do is get to step 3 when it comes to Jesus Christ or ANY other religion Hindu, Buddhism, Taoism (immortals), Egyptians, Native Americans, etc. It's not possible. For that matter why is Christ right and real, while you perceive these other religions as pagan or fairy tales?
Do you want me to make something up? Will that make you happier? I could perhaps found a new religion because that is often how that happens, someone imagines what makes sense to them to explain something, speculates, tells someone else or writes a book, gee that guy is intelligent, collects followers, is called a cult, gets even more followers, now it's a religion.
By the way I do agree with you that there are "so-called christians" and "so-called scientists". I've replied elsewhere explaining the so-called scientists.
As to Christians. I believe that describes MOST modern day Christians I've met. They definitely don't seem to be following the way of Christ. In fact once he was gone they seemed to go right back to doing things the way the Pharisees were doing before Christ told them to stop.
Christ freed people, and he was gone they went back to being slaves.
I admire the Sermon on the Mount and a lot of the moral ideas in what Christ is attributed with saying I really do. Yet, honestly I believe I live closer to those words than 90% of the Christians I've met. I do not consider myself a Christian. Just a man.
Yes. Sad but true. But God has preserved a remnant for Himself.
“I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” In the same way, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. -- Romans 11:4-5