Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-29-2017 5:24 AM
391 online now:
(391 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,689 Year: 10,295/21,208 Month: 3,382/2,674 Week: 798/961 Day: 1/109 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234Next
Author Topic:   Science proves that the tomb of Jesus (Christ ?)and James the Just have been found.
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 716
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1 of 54 (797195)
01-13-2017 4:29 PM


James Tabor has a good site but his great articles delete after they go beyond the bottom of his page 10. This jewel of an article is about to vanish. "Ben Witherington on the James Ossuary and the Talpiot “Jesus” Tomb" from May of 2015.

In the (soon to vanish)article,Tabor makes the point that the leading fundamentalist scholar Ben Witherington has clearly stated that the James Ossuary indeed is actually the ossuary of the James of Acts 15. Yes James and his coffin have been discovered! (I'll get to the disagreement later)

quote:

Ben Witherington1 has a new blog post titled “Once More with Feeling: Did the James Ossuary come out of the Talpiot Tomb?” in response to Sunday’s NYTimes story on the recently concluded chemical tests carried out on the controversial “James son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” ossuary and several dozen other randomly selected 1st century Jerusalem ossuaries, including those in the Talpiot “Jesus son of Joseph” tomb
....
Ben is a friend, he even grew up in Charlotte ....For Ben there can be no tomb holding the bones of Jesus–much less his family–since he was taken bodily (bones and all) to heaven 40 days after the resurrection of his physical body–leaving behind his empty tomb.
....
We do agree on one thing–the authenticity of the inscription of the James ossuary and its very likely connection, not just to “any Jesus” of the 1st century, but to Jesus of Nazareth, see my post here [ https://jamestabor.com/...james-ossuary-and-the-talpiot-tomb ]. In fact, with co-author Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, Ben “wrote the book” on the James ossuary, namely The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus & His Family back in 2003, shortly after the public debut of the ossuary. It remains, in my view, the “gold standard” among the many subsequent books that have come out.

The line of demarcation is whether it belongs to the Talpiot Tomb which has a Jesus and Mary and Joseph present as well. Witherington says it does not belong there.

That sets up the presentation of the scientific evidence. But first Tabor responds to Witherington's blog post.

quote:

Witherington begins by questioning whether Dr. Aryeh Shimron, whose expertise is in ancient “plaster,” is qualified to do the kinds of chemical and soil analysis these tests involve. Dr. Shimron’s broad qualifications and distinguished career in the field of geo-archaeology is well known in his field so there is no need for further comment.2 He then laments that Ammon Rosenfeld, who worked with Shimron for the Geological Survey of Israel is no longer with us, since he would be able to comment on Shimron’s latest work. Dr. Rosenfeld, whom I knew well, died tragically in a car accident last July. What Witherington apparently does not know or recall is that Rosenfeld firmly believed that the James ossuary came from the Talpiot tomb simply based on patina tests. He was the lead author of a paper “The Connection of the James Ossuary to the Talpiot Tomb,” available on-line here. [http://bibleinterp.com/PDFs/JOTalpiot3.pdf]


The scientific evidence on the patina is an older issue. It was part of a courtroom drama in Israel which ended favorably for those arguing that the inscription was indeed authentically about 2000 years old.

The newer issue is the soil analysis and the test done which reveal the chemical composition.

quote:

The Earthquake and East Talpiot. Dr. Shimron first got his idea for these chemical ossuary tests in 2008 at the Princeton sponsored “Jerusalem Symposium on the Talpiot Jesus tomb” organized by James Charlesworth. The papers from this conference are now published in a marvelous 585 page volume, James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Tomb of Jesus and His Family? (Eerdmans, 2013), that explores the Talpiot “Jesus” tomb and related issues from all viewpoints.

I happened to be sitting next to Shimron as Shimon Gibson was presenting his paper, pointing out that the blocking stone of the Talpiot tomb had apparently been missing long before 1980 when the tomb was discovered by the building blast–so the tomb was left open for an extended time and had filled up with soil–covering even the tops of the ossuaries in the inner tomb. Shimron immediately had the idea that deeply scraped samples, below the surface patina, from the bottom and inside of the Talpiot tomb ossuaries, would provide a chemical signature based on the soil absorbed by the porous limestone over the centuries, that could then be used for comparison with other ossuaries–including that of James–to possibly determine provenance. It was a hypothesis at this stage, but one that could be tested.

Shimron thought that the patina comparisons of the James ossuary and those in the Talpiot tomb were important but not wholly definitive–even though they had already pointed in the direction of a connection between the James and Jesus ossuaries. These tests were done by Pellegrino in 2007 (published in the Charlesworth volume) and supplemented with further testing and analysis in 2014 by the late Amnon Rosenfeld (with Krumbein, Pelligrino, Feldman) in an article titled “The Connection of the James Ossuary to the Talpiot Tomb,” that I cited above.

Shimron was particularly intrigued the the question of how and when the Talpiot tomb had had its blocking stone dislodged, and filled with soil. I suggested that he take a look at British and PEF aerial photographs of the East Talpiot area when it was bare without any buildings and see if he could learn anything. He followed up on that and discovered clear evidence of tectonic slides specifically at the Armon Hanatziv ridge, where the Jesus tomb is located. He presented his thesis at the Bar Ilan University conference “New Studies on Jerusalem,” arguing that the phenomenon was related to the 363 C.E. earthquake that devastated Jerusalem and the wider region. His presentation was well received and the resulting paper, co-written with Moshe Shirav, “The Armon Hanatziv Tectonic Slide and Some Archaeological Implications,” is now published and is available for download here. I find it quite persuasive and I know Ben will want to carefully read it.


This 363 earthquake is actually a quake that stopped Julian the Apostate from rebuilding the Temple of Jerusalem for the Jews. He allowed Jews to return to Jerusalem and he sent in workers to conduct an underground survey as past of the rebuilding project. An explosion from the earthquake scared off the surveyors and they never got around to the project as Julian died soon after. Jews were expelled after Julian died. The gentile Christian members of the imperial church saw the earthquake as something God sent to stifle his enemies (the Jews). It actually could be part of what might be something of a modern earthquake of evidence (for those with ears to hear this blacked-out story) that Tabor keeps bringing us. Maybe those evil Jews weren't hated by God. Catholics and Protestants might be forced to reappraise their historical attribution of natural disasters to God and his "hatred of Jews" perhaps?

Here is the link to the scientific study
https://www.researchgate.net/..._Archaeological_Implications

Tabor continues to quote Witherington

quote:

The Talpiot Tomb Soil Fill in East Talpiot. Ben is mistaken about the soil of East Talpiot being the same as soil through the Jerusalem area. He wrote me an e-mail immediately this past Sunday morning after reading the NYTimes piece:

[Witherington said]
["]There is no such thing as a chemical fingerprint as is suggested in the report. There might well be many ossuaries from many places around Jerusalem that ended up in caves which would test out with a similar chemical residue. Why? Because the type of seepage and residue is the same in multiple places in Jerusalem. It’s not specific to the Talpiot tomb! Jerusalem limestone is Jerusalem limestone, and the ground seepage is bound to be similar in numerous places.["]

[back to Tabor's words]
Frankly I found these dogmatic assertions rather amazing. One has to wonder, how Prof. Witherington, a New Testament scholar, would know such things, and would assert his views over those of Dr. Shimron, who has done field-work on this for the past seven years and has professional qualifications.

What Shimron determined is that the soil that had filled the Talpiot “Jesus” tomb was a one-time event in the past. It was not built up over the years with silt and water laid layers of soil, bit by bit. He could determine that from the ossuaries as well as the walls of the tomb itself. The result is that “time stopped,” because of this soil burial. Two things resulted: 1. The buried ossuaries absorbed trace amounts of the chemistry of the soil and muck; 2. Only one kind of material could enter the ossuaries and that was the material in which the ossuaries were buried. These two left items left their unique chemical signature on the Talpiot and James ossuaries.

When it comes to the issue that all soil in Jerusalem is the same, the fact is that Witherington is just plain wrong. East Talpiot is different than the other regions of Jerusalem. Rendzina soil is characteristic of east Jerusalem, not the rest of Jerusalem, but it is the way in which deeply penetrated the limestone ossuaries that allowed Shimron to test for any possible chemical signature. For example, one of the ossuaries scraped was taken from Talpiot Tomb B--just 60 meters from the Jesus tomb. It is the only one Amos Kloner took out in 1981 and it is in the Israel Antiquities Authority collection4 Even given the same kind of soil on the same ancient estate–as determined by Joseph Gat the original excavator–Shimron found no characteristic chemical pattern that would link it with the Jesus tomb ossuaries nearby.

Shimon Gibson is surely right that there are other soil filled tombs in the Jerusalem area. I know of two myself, in the Hinnom Valley, just adjacent to our “Tomb of the Shroud,” discovered in 2000.5 Ossuaries from this area were in fact sampled, including from the Shroud Tomb, and there is no chemical match. Also these tombs were filled by silt and build-up over time, not in one major event. Also the soil is distinctively different.


Now to the evidence

quote:

Shimon Gibson is my colleague here at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, I have excavated with him for 15 years (Suba and Mt Zion), and I consider him to be among the most knowledgeable people on the planet when it comes to the history and archaeology of Jerusalem. In addition, he was present at the original Jesus tomb excavation in 1980 and produced the official map of the tomb. Shimon and I disagree on Talpiot and the Jesus family tomb identification rather sharply, but our interchanges are professional and respectful. He does not accuse me of “leaping” to my conclusions based on flimsy evidence nor do I think him “dense” for not sharing my views. He openly recommends my publications and papers and encourages a wide debate and discussion. Shimon is an honest and open minded person and he does change his views, often, based on new evidence. I feel the same about Chris Rollston and Mark Goodacre, who also disagree with me and me with them, but our ASOR sponsored forum a few years ago was to me a model of proper academic exchange–see the papers, pro and con, archived at Bible & Interpretation. [ http://bibleinterp.com/articles/2013/tab378024.shtml ]

Chemical Fingerprints. Prof. Witherington tells us that “there is no such thing as a chemical fingerprint,” referring to Dr. Shimron’s work. Again, I have no idea how he would know such a thing as a New Testament scholar reacting to a NYTimes story he just read on Sunday. Even Dr. Shimron did not know his results before the tests were done. Ben seems to think one tests for a few stray elements–he mentions phosphorus, chrome and nickel–when it fact as 33 elements are precisely measured. Only with the Talpiot tomb A ossuaries and that of James brother of Jesus did these signatures correspond in a significant way.

I want to also stress that the samples were collected by the Israel Antiquities Authority, not by Dr. Shimron or Simcha Jacobovici, and the tests were lab tests carried out at some of the top scientific facilities in Israel. Dr. Shimron was the one who had the idea and developed the hypothesis–but like all scientific work, everything then has to be tested.

Weathering and Pitting. Professor Witherington points out that the main visible way in which the James ossuary differs from the other ossuaries from the Talpiot Jesus tomb is its weathered and pitted exterior. He is certainly correct. That’s not an issue with respect to the work that Shimron did. Shimron went beneath the patina, about 2 mm into the ossuary itself to see what had been absorbed over 2,000 years by the limestone. The surface simply doesn’t matter to this test. Having said this, it didn’t matter to Rosenfeld and Krumbein either. What weathering does do is make sense of the 11th ossuary theory i.e., that it was closer to the opening. The Talpiot Jesus tomb had a “porch” or antichamber entrance, before one entered the main tomb complex. It was entirely blown away by the 1980 construction blast. With the missing blocking stone it might well be the case that the James ossuary was near the entrance–placed in the tomb last–having previously been in the Kidron/Hinnom valley area. It explains why somebody could have stolen it in the mid-70s and sold it to Oded Golan. The reason is simple, the James ossuary was near the opening. So not only does it not contradict Shimron’s work, it makes sense of the 11th ossuary theory.

Not Enough Samples. Oded Golan, the owner of the James ossuary is quote in the NYTimes story saying the test sample was much too narrow–and suggesting that one would need to check at least 200-300 tombs to draw the conclusions Shimron has reached. Witherington, in contrast, mercifully reduces the number he thinks would be required:

["]You would have to do tests on say a 50 ossuaries from various places around Jerusalem and compare them to the ones in the Talpiot tomb before you could come to any sort of scientific conclusions of the sort that are made in this report.["] (e-mail, April 5, 2015)

In his blog post he echoes the same objection. Again, how Ben would know this I have no idea. Most of us are familiar with “random” sampling, as used in any number of ways in scientific tests. I immediately thought of the analysis of the Qumran cemetery, with up to 1100 graves, done by Joe Zias and others, based on the few dozen that have been “randomly” opened. In this case Shimron carried out tests on approximately 100 samples, three taken from each ossuary, taken from 15 tombs. He did not do only one test on an ossuary. He did not select the ossuaries, the IAA did that. And they were distributed throughout Jerusalem, but included all nine of the Talpiot Jesus tomb ossuaries (the 10th is missing) plus the James ossuary that Oded Golan was kind enough to make available. The results, according to Dr. Shimron, are definitive. I know him to be a very cautious man and he has, along the way, he has always raised sharp scientific questions on issues related to the Jesus tomb. He is willing to say publicly, putting his career on the line, “The evidence could not be stronger than what we have,” linking the James ossuary to the Talpiot tomb.”


Later on, another test is mentioned, this one being on statistics.

quote:

Conclusion. This is a story that has been over 10 years in the making, with many complex strands (Talpiot tomb A and B; epigraphy, prosopography, statistics, DNA, and chemical tests) and its controversial nature will not simply disappear. If it were the tomb of any other 1st century Jew we would likely not even have an argument, but since millions believe that Jesus was raised from the dead in his physical body, which was then taken to heaven, theological issues come to play as well. And faith. Simcha was asked in the NBC interview above whether it took “faith” for him to be absolutely persuaded, particularly with this new evidence adding the James ossuary to the mix, that this was the tomb of Jesus and his family. His reply was interesting: Faith only comes into it if you want to believe that it is not.”

Several academics have already begun to suggest how the addition of the James ossuary to the names found in the Talpiot Jesus tomb would affect the probability statistics. You can read a preliminary analysis, “The James Ossuary at Talpiot,” by Kilty and Elliot on-line at Bibleinterp.com here. [ http://bibleinterp.com/articles/2011/05/kilell358029.shtml ] I encourage everyone to take a look at this article as it considers a wide range of related issues, beyond the new statistical calculations. They are convinced one goes from 48% to 92% probability–that this tomb can be identified with that of Jesus of Nazareth. We also now have the reworked calculations of statistician Jerry Lutgen, see here. [ http://bibleinterp.com/opeds/2015/04/lut398012.shtml ]


Then his conclusion

quote:

The final irony in all this is that folks like Ben Witherington face a real dilemma here. Ben absolutely accepts the high likelihood of the James ossuary–take alone–to Jesus of Nazareth–not just to “any Jesus” of the time. Statistician Camil Fuchs did some impressive work on this question that you can read in the Witherington/Shanks book, James the Brother of Jesus. But if you add this authentic James ossuary to a Talpiot Jesus tomb–the tomb further authenticates the James ossuary and gives it a provenance, while the James ossuary solidifies the identification of the “Jesus son of Joseph” of the tomb with the brother of Jesus. One supports the other, and normally that would be good news, but because of theological assumptions about Jesus’ physical body being taken to heaven–it just can’t be. It is like a man accused of murder, whose wife believes him to be innocent. The man has a rock solid alibi but he fears to tell his wife–or the court. At the time of the murder he was in bed with her best friend.

My own sense of things, having done historical work on both Jesus and James now over my 35 year career, is that to find them together in life and in death is an incredibly moving thing.
https://jamestabor.com/...ossuary-and-the-talpiot-jesus-tomb


two more links in aticle.
https://jamestabor.com/...iscovery-of-the-talpiot-jonah-tomb

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...jewish-hair-ever-found

I'm not a scientists but it is amazing that we seem to have stunning cumulative evidence


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 01-14-2017 2:32 PM LamarkNewAge has responded
 Message 4 by frako, posted 01-14-2017 7:10 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 01-15-2017 10:42 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 11:50 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 24 by caffeine, posted 01-16-2017 1:46 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 46 by Theodoric, posted 02-01-2017 8:54 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12436
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 54 (797197)
01-14-2017 7:49 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Science proves that the tomb of Jesus (Christ ?)and James the Just have been found. thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9284
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 3 of 54 (797205)
01-14-2017 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by LamarkNewAge
01-13-2017 4:29 PM


Conclusion
Im not sure I believe any of this. What possible use is this article? If Jesus was buried with his family, that shoots a hole in all of the Bible stories...which could possibly be the motive of the study. Whats your personal opinion, LNA?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-13-2017 4:29 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Tangle, posted 01-15-2017 3:48 AM Phat has responded
 Message 28 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-19-2017 3:11 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 32 by ringo, posted 01-20-2017 11:05 AM Phat has responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2687
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 4 of 54 (797209)
01-14-2017 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by LamarkNewAge
01-13-2017 4:29 PM


We posses the DNA of Jesus Christ???? Do you realise what this means ??? All we need is a healthy ovum and we can grow our own jesus christ!!!

Couldent help myself its from the big bang theory.

If someone actually did that would that be the fulfilment of the prophecy of Jesus coming back, ushering in a 1000 years of peace and whatnot, proving all of us atheists wrong.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-13-2017 4:29 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by ringo, posted 01-16-2017 11:13 AM frako has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4546
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 5 of 54 (797215)
01-15-2017 3:48 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Phat
01-14-2017 2:32 PM


Re: Conclusion
Phat writes:

What possible use is this article?

What a strange question. It's research into the veracity of an important piece of our history. Why wouldn't that be useful regardless of what the findings are?

If Jesus was buried with his family, that shoots a hole in all of the Bible stories....

And what if it did? Is it therefore not to be done? Of course if it actually did show that it would make no difference to believers, they'll carry on believing no matter what the evidence. Their beliefs originate in their own mind, not reality.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 01-14-2017 2:32 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 11:46 AM Tangle has responded
 Message 14 by NoNukes, posted 01-16-2017 2:52 AM Tangle has responded

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 6 of 54 (797218)
01-15-2017 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by LamarkNewAge
01-13-2017 4:29 PM


so what's the evidence?
I'm not a scientists but it is amazing that we seem to have stunning cumulative evidence

What's the stunning cumulative evidence? You posted a lot of blog posts, but I'm no more enlightened. Perhaps you should put into your own words what the evidence actually is?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-13-2017 4:29 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9284
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 7 of 54 (797220)
01-15-2017 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Tangle
01-15-2017 3:48 AM


Re: Conclusion
To be honest, what annoys me is not the research so much as LNA's search for nonsense. This is not a Faith & Belief topic.

Of course if it actually did show that it would make no difference to believers, they'll carry on believing no matter what the evidence. Their beliefs originate in their own mind, not reality.
Reality does not originate in our own minds either.

Beliefs originate from the acceptance or denial of the object of belief.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Tangle, posted 01-15-2017 3:48 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Tangle, posted 01-15-2017 12:31 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9284
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 8 of 54 (797221)
01-15-2017 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by LamarkNewAge
01-13-2017 4:29 PM


LNA writes:

I'm not a scientist but it is amazing that we seem to have stunning cumulative evidence

Evidence of what? More to the point...how is this a Faith topic? What is it that the evidence will strengthen your faith in?


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-13-2017 4:29 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Porosity, posted 01-15-2017 12:10 PM Phat has responded

  
Porosity
Member
Posts: 104
From: MT, USA
Joined: 06-15-2013
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 9 of 54 (797223)
01-15-2017 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
01-15-2017 11:50 AM


Evidence of what? More to the point...how is this a Faith topic? What is it that the evidence will strengthen your faith in?

Exactly.. Faith does not require evidence, all you need to do is believe real hard and zombies are real.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 11:50 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 3:28 PM Porosity has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4546
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 10 of 54 (797224)
01-15-2017 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Phat
01-15-2017 11:46 AM


Re: Conclusion
Phat writes:

To be honest, what annoys me is not the research so much as LNA's search for nonsense.

I can agree with that :-)

Reality does not originate in our own minds either.

Well no, it originates outside our minds and is interpreted within them.

Beliefs originate from the acceptance or denial of the object of belief.

I can't make that make sense for me I'm afraid. But the distinction is that a belief is ONLY in the mind - it doesn't exist anywhere else. Unlike, say a 2,000 year old tomb.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 11:46 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9284
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 11 of 54 (797225)
01-15-2017 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Porosity
01-15-2017 12:10 PM


Faith and Science
are you suggesting that all make believe stuff is in the same category? If so I agree...all the stuff that humans invented through stories. Of course, this argument carries over to beliefs within organized religions....in which case I would recommend you go with jars philosophies as no God is even required in order to do them.

Or just go with Stile and try and find your own world view.

My view is that this stuff is not made up. Of course, I have no way of proving this to you guys, and quite frankly I'm beginning to think I'm wasting my time trying.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Porosity, posted 01-15-2017 12:10 PM Porosity has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Porosity, posted 01-15-2017 4:04 PM Phat has responded
 Message 13 by Tangle, posted 01-15-2017 6:16 PM Phat has responded

  
Porosity
Member
Posts: 104
From: MT, USA
Joined: 06-15-2013
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 12 of 54 (797227)
01-15-2017 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Phat
01-15-2017 3:28 PM


Re: Faith and Science
That's why we have science.
If you can't science that shit, then there's a good chance it's made up and you're probably wasting your life away to a delusion.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 3:28 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Phat, posted 01-16-2017 6:41 AM Porosity has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4546
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 13 of 54 (797233)
01-15-2017 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Phat
01-15-2017 3:28 PM


Re: Faith and Science
Phat writes:

My view is that this stuff is not made up.

We know.

Of course, I have no way of proving this to you guys

This is because it's internal to you, and only to you. Subjective.

I'm beginning to think I'm wasting my time trying.

Of course you are. Well you are if you're hoping to change anybody's mind about anything. So you have to ask why you're here - as do the rest of us. I'm here because I like argument and I'm tying to understand why people with beliefs that I find preposterous and utterly indefensible hold them despite the evidence against them.

I sense that you're here to explain to yourself why you hold them.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Phat, posted 01-15-2017 3:28 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Phat, posted 01-16-2017 6:50 AM Tangle has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9452
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 14 of 54 (797240)
01-16-2017 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Tangle
01-15-2017 3:48 AM


Re: Conclusion
What a strange question. It's research into the veracity of an important piece of our history. Why wouldn't that be useful regardless of what the findings are?

It may be useful, although it is difficult to sift through the OP and determine how it might be useful.

On the other hand, I don't think this message fits in the Faith and Belief section. Generally speaking, science stuff is not the accepted line of argument in such forums. In this forum, remarking that the idea that Jesus is buried in any tomb is counter-textual is a perfectly legitimate comment.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Tangle, posted 01-15-2017 3:48 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Tangle, posted 01-16-2017 3:14 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4546
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 15 of 54 (797242)
01-16-2017 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by NoNukes
01-16-2017 2:52 AM


Re: Conclusion
NoNukes writes:


It may be useful, although it is difficult to sift through the OP and determine how it might be useful.

Agreed. As usual, Lamark has produced a long and convoluted post of the kind I rarely if ever bother reading - they all seem manic. On this occasion I just went to the wiki page to find wtf he was taking about.

On the other hand, I don't think this message fits in the Faith and Belief section. Generally speaking, science stuff is not the accepted line of argument in such forums. In this forum, remarking that the idea that Jesus is buried in any tomb is counter-textual is a perfectly legitimate comment.

Where a post is put doesn't interest me as much as what is being said. Challenging the idea on a posting technicality seems a bit churlish; personally I thought the idea that Jesus was buried in a family tomb frightened Phat somewhat and he wanted it closed down.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by NoNukes, posted 01-16-2017 2:52 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by NoNukes, posted 01-16-2017 3:26 PM Tangle has responded

  
1
234Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017