 Is it possible for any human being to continue to live for many centuries, as is presumed in the case of this evaded savior who has already lived for more than 1,150 years? This lying life is about 14 times the life of an ordinary man who passes through all the stages of life from infancy to old age? The impossibility of such a lying life is the objection. Let us have a close look at the objection. The word impossibility, like any other truth, is relative. It has meaning only in relation to some person, place and time. What is impossible for one person need not to be so for the others? Then what is impossible in one place? Maybe quite possible in another place? Again, what is not possible at one time? Maybe quite possible at another? There is no dearth of illustrations to prove how impossibility is a relative term. In other words, the possibility of a thing may be of three categories, factual possibility, scientific possibility and logic possibility, practical possibility. The journey across the ocean to reach the bottom of the sea and to travel to the moon are practical possibilities. There are people who have accomplished these tasks in one way or another. How about scientific possibility? By scientific possibility, we mean that there may be certain things which may not be practicable in the present circumstances. But there exists no scientific reason to justify the denial of their practicability and favorable circumstances and the scientific trends indicate that they will be visible sooner or later. For example, there is no scientific reason to deny the possibility of man's traveling to Venice, although it has not been possible for anyone to go to that planet so far. Yet we know that there is only a difference of degree between man's landing on the moon and his landing on Venice. It is only a question of surmounting additional difficulties because of the greater distance. Hence, it is scientifically possible to go to Venice, though practically it is still impossible. In contrast, it is scientifically impossible to go to the sun in the sense that science doesn't hope that it will ever be able to manufacture a protective shield against the heat of the sun, which is virtually a huge furnace blazing at the highest imaginable degree of temperature. The other one, logical possibility. By logical possibility, we mean that on the basis of self-evident laws, reason does not regard a thing impossible. For example, it is logically impossible to divide three oranges into two equal parts without cutting any one of them. It is self-evident that three being an odd number, it is not divisible into two whole numbers. Only an even number can be divided and the same number cannot be both odd and even simultaneously. Because that will mean self-contradiction, which is impossible. But a man's interring into fire without being heard or going to the sun without being affected by its heat is not logically impossible. For it is not self-contradictory to suppose that heat does not pass from a body having a higher temperature to a body having a lower temperature. Only experience has proved that if two bodies are mixed or put together, heat passes from a body having higher temperature to a body having lower temperature. Till the temperature of both, the body is at par. Thus, we know that the scope of the logical possibility is wider than that of the scientific possibility and the scope of the scientific possibility is wider than that of the practical possibility.