You cannot deny Jesus' existence
I hope I may be permitted to respond to criticism of my earlier letter in which I compared the absurdity of the denial of the existence of Jesus Christ to Holocaust denial.
Callum Collier misunderstood my point; it was the very existence of Jesus Christ which was being challenged, and this is a historical fact.
I do not apologise for expressing the truth. Alan Pendragon's letter was more hostile: he may query my simile, as is his right, but it is certainly not puerile.
It is worthwhile pointing out that our Muslim brethren also regard Jesus Christ as a significant prophet in their faith. Even many so-called secularists acknowledge Jesus Christ as a good man.
Mark W. Jacques OP, Quorn
This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury (but not on its website):
No evidence of historical Jesus
Mark Jacques's puerile simile comparing the questioning of Christ's existence to being on the same level as a Holocaust denier (Mailbox, July 19) shows just how low he is prepared to sink when rubbishing anyone who dares to question the faith that he so obviously regards as undeniable fact.
The substantive evidence for the Holocaust - the gas chambers, the mass graves, the spoken and written testimony of the survivors, camp officers and guards - is beyond doubt.
There is no substantive evidence to prove that Christ ever existed.
The only thing to even suggest his existence are the stories written about him in the New Testament, which was not published until 400 years after his supposed death, by which time there was no one living to give eyewitness testimony anyway.
Throughout history, writers have chronicled the events of the places, people and events that tell humanity's story.
Strange, then, that contemporary historians living in the places where Christ is said to have lived, preached and travelled, mention nothing of his existence, let alone the effect that his actions are said to have had in riling the authorities of the time leading up to his crucifixion.
When the Christian theologian and writer F W Farrah (1831-1903) read through these writings, he expressed his surprise and dismay when he wrote: "There is no statement in all history that says anyone ever saw Jesus or talked with him.
"Nothing in history is more astonishing than the silence of contemporary writers of contemporary writers about events relayed in the four Gospels."
Astonishing? I'll say it is.
If Jesus did walk among us and had the impact on society as described in the Bible, and a historian of that time had not acknowledged it, it would be like a modern historian writing a comprehensive biographical account of British Prime Ministers of the 20th century and totally failing to include Margaret Thatcher and the impact she had on world politics in the 1980s. It just couldn't happen.
Alan R Pendragon, Leicester
This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury (but not on its website):
Faith and facts are not the same
Mr Jacques is quite right (July 19), Holocaust deniers peddle their argument when they and everybody else know it is untrue.
They do it because they are politically-motivated racists who think that if they say it often enough ignorant people with no other source of information or the same prejudice will believe it.
Where Mr Jacques's argument falls down is that, by his own admission, the stories he points to are built on faith. They are a belief, no doubt strongly held, but they are not irrefutable fact.
They may be true, we cannot say one way or the other and, as he states, he has the right to "express an opinion openly, however outlandish it may be".
But he has no right to compare messrs Pendragon and Hipwell (June 29, July 3) to Holocaust deniers and he should apologise.
If you will allow me to be pedantic, the prefix "so-called" is usually applied when the writer does not agree with the accusation.
I am sure this is not the case with Mr Jacques.
Callum Collier, Leicester
Making a case by simple denial
When I read the recent letters from Messrs Pendragon and Hipwell, querying the very existence of Jesus Christ, two reactions came immediately to my mind. The first was how lucky we all are to have sufficient freedom in this country, to be able to express an opinion openly, however, outlandish it may be.
The second was to draw a comparison with so-called Holocaust deniers: these people claim that the Holocaust of the gas-chambers of the Second World War and associated atrocities never happened – even though it is perfectly clear they did. This is one way of making your case: pretending that the subject in question never existed!
Mark W Jacques OP, Quorn
