Religion
In reply to the discussion: Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn’t add up. [View all]Feral Child
(2,086 posts)work on faith..."
No. Scientists conjecture, then rigorously test their hypotheses. If the results prove them wrong, they discard the premise and begin anew.
Occasionally an accepted theory is proven incorrect by later experiment and acquired information, then the true scientist abandons his position gladly, accepting the newer knowledge and works from a more informed perspective.
Your statement indicates you have no understanding of the scientific method.
That's how you choose which are legitimate, the "you", of course, not being those who fail to understand how science works.
That's the exact opposite of "faith".
EDIT: Oh, and absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. It's not proof. You're quoting a "clever" mincing of words, but you fail to understand the difference between "evidence" and "proof".
The lack of evidence persuades that Jesus doesn't exist. The emotionally needful refuse to accept it, though, because the truth is too painful to endure. Le condition humaine...