|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Jesus Tomb Found | |||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Creavolution writes: Yes, that is what I meant before NJ began his dodge and weave manoeuvre.. Could be just a misunderstanding.
and why not the Qu'ran? why not any other religious text? why not Lord of the Rings? Why not James Joyce's Ulysses? You have left the realm of reasonable debate with this sentance. I am not sure of your point. I will say it again differently. The Bible can be taken as accurate until proved otherwise. There is no concrete proof that invalidates most of the NT. Any evidence against the Biblical account must be pretty solid before it can be said to invalidate it. Say I read a biography. I can believe it. Until, I read another which says something contradictory. If that happens, someone needs to do some proving before I go believe either of them. It would be silly to believe the second one over the first for no reason. All I am saying is that we are not sure if the second biography in this case is even about the same person, so I would need a little more evidence of that nature before I could even begin to question which is the truer biography.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
confirming two dubious artifacts with each other is shaky at best. however, i wanted to point out something interesting: finding a shroud and a tomb separately isn't especially a big deal. first century jews typically buried people in shrouds until they decomposed, and then moved their bones to ossuaries. what they did with the shrouds afterwards, i don't know, and it might vary from case to case. This doesn't seem to make much sense to me since decomposing bodies are considered unclean. Why would they go back in to a tomb and wait for them to be rotting to only then place them where they could have been placed from the beginning, an ossuary?
i suspect the shroud is a forgery, and the tomb is being misrepresented. I concur with you on both counts.
jesus is supposed to have been buried in jerusalem, according to the nt. but i agree, it doesn't make sense. Well, after juxtaposing Jewish law and the topography of Israel, it would make most sense that he be buried in Jerusalem. Reason: Because bodies have to be in the ground no later than a 24 hour period, and Nazareth was more than a days trek in those days.
i think it might be a desperate attempt to validate some kind of belief. the last program they did went to great lengths to support the exodus, misrepresenting everything they could in the process to make things work. I read about this too. First of all, I believe the in the veracity of the exodus, but conducting feasibility tests does not in one or the other prove the exodus occurred.
i suspect this is no different. jesus's body might disprove some christianity, but it would at least verify that he was a real person. this seems like another gambit, to me. Perhaps usurping Christianity is the motivation. Afterall, most Jews believe that Yeshua was a real person connected to their history. The only thing that sets him apart is that he is one of a handful of false messiah's to them.
but i could be wrong. james cameron strikes me a christian, but simcha jacobovici is an israeli jew. so perhaps it's a divided attempt to prove to things, from very strange bedfellows. On March 4th we might uncover what their motivations are because that's when the Discovery channel is going to air their documentary "The Lost Tomb of Jesus." "A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1303 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
ana writes:
So..Shy do you not apply this reasoning to other religious texts? The Bible can be taken as accurate until proved otherwise.Have you Proved that the Qu'ran is not true? how have you proved this? Have you done the same for Buddhist Texts? for Hindu texts? for Sikh texts? ana writes:
But that is exactly what you do, when you accept the bible, above all other religious texts. You yourself state that unless one text is disproven you believe it. It would be silly to believe the second one over the first for no reason. Please tell me the process you went through to Disprove all other religious texts. I would be fascinated to see if you apply this rigour to the bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Creavolution writes: So what 'evidence' do you have that stops you believing in faeries? leprechauns? any other myths? None. I never believed in them. I am sure some people do and did, so you could ask them what evidence they would need to stop.
It is interesting that you cannot apply this reasoning to belief in Christianity. Seeing is not believing. That was the point. You don't need evidence to believe, you need it to not believe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Creavolution writes: So..Shy do you not apply this reasoning to other religious texts?Have you Proved that the Qu'ran is not true? how have you proved this? Have you done the same for Buddhist Texts? for Hindu texts? for Sikh texts? Of course I have not proved that any other texts are not true, or in some part true.
But that is exactly what you do, when you accept the bible, above all other religious texts. You yourself state that unless one text is disproven you believe it. Where do all these other texts mention Jesus, so that I may compare biographies? We are talking about the tomb of Jesus here, right? When it comes to the Bible, there are myriads of texts that have been disproven, and myriads more no one is sure about. I can't even cover all of those in a life-time, let alone make a judgement on the tens of thousands of other religious texts.
Please tell me the process you went through to Disprove all other religious texts. I would be fascinated to see if you apply this rigour to the bible. Huh? Can I disprove the existance of Buddha or Mohamed? Do I have the knowledge to make a decision about what parts of their lives have been potrayed accurately? Can I tell you that nothing in any other books is true? Silly. I can only tell you that I do not believe their philosphies regarding the after-life, primarily. I can't prove they are wrong, I just don't believe that way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1303 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
ana writes:
So... You do NOT believe in the teachings of the Qu'ran right? You don't need evidence to believe, you need it to not believe.You say you need evidence not to believe this. Where is your evidence? If I say to you that there's a big green alien standing beside me with feather dusters for hands and spaghetti for hair.Do you believe me? if not, why not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1364 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
This doesn't seem to make much sense to me since decomposing bodies are considered unclean. Why would they go back in to a tomb and wait for them to be rotting to only then place them where they could have been placed from the beginning, an ossuary? i should have been more clear. it's when they've completely decomposed, and only bones are left. they did this for space -- not a lot of room in family tombs, and they had to fit in every member of several generations. ossuaries are pretty small: you can't put a whole body in one. just bones.
Well, after juxtaposing Jewish law and the topography of Israel, it would make most sense that he be buried in Jerusalem. Reason: Because bodies have to be in the ground no later than a 24 hour period, and Nazareth was more than a days trek in those days. well, yes. but it still doesn't make sense -- if there was a jesus ossuary, it would have been carried back to nazareth for permanent burial. heck, during the exodus, they did this with jacob's bones, right?
I read about this too. First of all, I believe the in the veracity of the exodus, but conducting feasibility tests does not in one or the other prove the exodus occurred. it's something of a pattern for this guy. there's a program on the history international channel (digital cable) called "the naked archaeologist." i caught part of an episode previously, but last night i caught a whole one, and realized the host/narrator/person occupying the most screentime was simcha jacobovici. and it's filled with the same jumps in logic, distortion of dates, and misrepresentations. to be fair, this program at least gave some screen time to his critics -- one of whom basically called him a crackpot to his face.
Perhaps usurping Christianity is the motivation. Afterall, most Jews believe that Yeshua was a real person connected to their history. The only thing that sets him apart is that he is one of a handful of false messiah's to them. i dunno about "usurping" but the rest seems to be true.
On March 4th we might uncover what their motivations are because that's when the Discovery channel is going to air their documentary "The Lost Tomb of Jesus." i'll be sure to voice my impressions when i see it, but i am no nt expert.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
nemesis writes: Well, after juxtaposing Jewish law and the topography of Israel, it would make most sense that he be buried in Jerusalem. Reason: Because bodies have to be in the ground no later than a 24 hour period, and Nazareth was more than a days trek in those days. This is supposing the Bible's account of Jesus' death. I agree that it seems likely from Jewish law that Jesus would be buried in Jerusalem, but I have heard rumours to the tune that Jesus may not have died, that there was a cover-up or something. I would have to check the sources, but it would be a possibility anyway. If Jesus had been still living after the Bible has Him dead, there is no telling where He could be buried.Not that I believe that of course. In the passage I cited about hanging bodies, they make mention of a shroud. I feel arach is correct about that, but might be able to unearth something more. And on a tangent, since you mentioned the shroud, there are other miracles which claim to have the blood of Jesus. All cases the blood is AB...but I have no idea about DNA tests.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
um, wasn't jesus executed by crucifixion? I'm wondering, because in your source, it claims:
quote: Secondly, why the change in execution? First it's claimed he was hung, then that he will be stoned, and then reverts back to "he was hanged". Because it appears that he was set to be hanged according to two sources. The first by what you quoted from, taken from the Sanhedrin, and the second from the Toledoth Yeshu, which says: "Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath. When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke..." But then again, this account gives conflicting views, possibly conflating two or more accounts, because it attempts to explain Jesus' disposition when it says: "He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, "His body shall not remain all night upon the tree." But just prior it also says: "Yeshu was taken prisoner to the synagogue of Tiberias, and they bound him to a pillar. To allay his thirst they gave him vinegar to drink. On his head they set a crown of thorns. So, was he affixed to a pillar or a tree or a carob-stalk, or all three at some point? All three methods constitute hanging, because to hang means to suspend. Is it possible that He was set to die by the hands of the Pharisees by stoning and/or traditional hanging before they opted for the Romans to initiate their effective method of crucifixion?
How accurate is this translation? Because if the jesus of the bible was crucified, but this jesus was hanged, something tells me they aren't the same one. The website that I use for this comes from a strict sect of Judaism where the translation is of the Talmud is paramount.
Or did the authors of the bible just seriously screw up the execution account? Can that many authors contemporaneously affiliated with Jesus all get it wrong? Doubtful. Especially since this extra-biblical document records the same account, plus a few extraneous details. Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : typo "A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Crea writes: So... You do NOT believe in the teachings of the Qu'ran right?You say you need evidence not to believe this. Where is your evidence? Last time; I personally would need evidence to NOT believe the Biblical account of the death of Jesus. This was never about the Qu'ran or anything else. Typical non-fundy over-generalization and force a sentence to fit everywhere reaction.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5973 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
nemesis writes: So, was he affixed to a pillar or a tree or a carob-stalk, or all three at some point? I have no idea about the significance of the carob stalk, but the tree and the pillar are correct. Both. Remember the Scourging at the Pillar? That was the point where Jesus was whipped, and traditionally, while bound to a pillar. I am not all for this Sanhedrin account, I am not sure the first was referencing Jesus. The second seems to, but I am no expert. Still, we talked about Lent...the 40 days part is neat regarding Lent. For forty days they searched for witness in favor of Jesus, it said, or similar. Lent is the 40 days prior to Easter, and in a way, we are searching for witnesses in Jesus' favor during that time. Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1303 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
You are either misreading me or simply refusing to answer.
I'll make it easier... Question:Does this requirement for evidence (to NOT believe) reach to other things outside christianity? yes or no? If no:Why not? If yes:What evidence have you been privvy to that makes you not believe all the other religious stories?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1364 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
The second seems to, but I am no expert. i'm skeptical. i'll look it up when i get home from work, maybe.
Still, we talked about Lent...the 40 days part is neat regarding Lent. For forty days they searched for witness in favor of Jesus, it said, or similar. Lent is the 40 days prior to Easter, and in a way, we are searching for witnesses in Jesus' favor during that time. the nt portrays jesus's execution as immediately following his arrest. the last supper is either on passover or the night before. and jesus dies during the passover weekend. the span from gethsemane to resurrection is no more than 4 days.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
If the account is anti-Chrisitan polemic it might have got the idea from Lent. But really there is no way to portray both it and the Gospels as trustworthy account of the execution of Jesus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1364 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
i don't think the first account (about stoning, hanging, and 40 days) has anything to do with jesus at all. and the number 40, associated with time, is quite common in judaism and christianity. 40 days and nights of rain, 40 years in the sinai, 40 days tempted by satan, etc.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024