Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary
Posted on: Wed, 2007-02-28 20:31
Offline
Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary
I'm not sure if this has been posted yet or not, but I'll do it anyway.
[url=http://]http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/02/26/jesus.sburial.ap/index.html[/url]
This does seem a little too good to be true. I would like to believe that they accually found his bones, because it would end the "ascending into heaven" part of the bible, which would be a major blow. I'm not sure about the authenticity of it though, since there's so much contreversy surrounding the idea. So I'm not jumping to any conclusions yet, until all the facts are straight. What do you guys think of the acuallity of this being the real thing?
Fake.
^ Agreed, seems totally fake.
By the way, when's the last time James Cameron made a narrative film? Titantic?
Kinda like finding the bones of a John Smith. But is the bones of our savior John Smith?
1. During this time, every was Jesus. Just like a John or Chris today
2. Theirs no actual evidence of Jesus of Narzareth besides the Holy Bible... Which says we have two moons.
3. The Holy Bible says he was rose from the dead, so if this is Jesus of Narzeth, then the Bible (once agian) contradicts itself agian is not correct, or if it not him once again no physical evidence of Jesus yet.
I about this in the newspaper... i think that they found them a couple of years ago ...
Yeah, it seems like a strange leap... not real science...
Actually I would be nice to know if that was Jesus of Nazerth... That would mean the Bible is wrong, and Jesus isnt the Son of God... Hm... Everyone would convet to Judaism. The one from a few years ago is James, brother of Jesus. This one is Jesus.
[quote]1. During this time, every was Jesus. Just like a John or Chris today[/quote]
Quite so. Plus, Mary was one of the top three names as well.
[quote]2. Theirs no actual evidence of Jesus of Narzareth besides the Holy Bible... Which says we have two moons.[/quote]
That's right, KCahill. Keep treating the Bible as if it's one monolithic source rather than an assembly of many different writings over thousands of years. Yes, the "One verse throws the whole thing out" system is espoused by all the textual scholars...
First, where does it say we have two moons? But more importantly, why can't the Bible be counted as evidence?
[quote]3. The Holy Bible says he was rose from the dead, so if this is Jesus of Narzeth, then the Bible (once agian) contradicts itself agian is not correct, or if it not him once again no physical evidence of Jesus yet.[/quote]
Wait, hold on. You preceded this one with two arguments against the validity of these bones. But now it seems like you want to believe they're real, so you can really know Christianity is false. *sigh*
[quote]That's right, KCahill. Keep treating the Bible as if it's one monolithic source rather than an assembly of many different writings over thousands of years. Yes, the "One verse throws the whole thing out" system is espoused by all the textual scholars...[/quote]
When a book says soemone made a boat able to fit every animal on the planet and not sink is pure imagination. So is the beilef Jews were slaves to Egptians, tough not evidence appears to show.
[quote]Wait, hold on. You preceded this one with two arguments against the validity of these bones. But now it seems like you want to believe they're real, so you can really know Christianity is false. *sigh*[/quote]
Right and Wrong:
1. I wish the bones were real
2. For the sake for you and every other tesist, I know Jesus doesnt exists.
[quote]First, where does it say we have two moons?[/quote] Here let me correct myself, I meant twoo suns.
"God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and god set them in the firmament to give light to the earth" (Gen 1:16-17)
[quote]When a book says soemone made a boat able to fit every animal on the planet and not sink is pure imagination. So is the beilef Jews were slaves to Egptians, tough not evidence appears to show.[/quote]
Hmm. I have yet to see this evidence, but let's grant both of those to you. Let's say that Noah's Ark is allegory and the Jews were never slaves to the Egyptians.
What does that mean for the New Testament accounts of the life of Jesus Christ? Does that mean they are immediately labeled as fiction? If you think so, then back up your answer with your methadology.
[quote]Right and Wrong:
1. I wish the bones were real[/quote]
I bet you do.
[quote]2. For the sake for you and every other tesist, I know Jesus doesnt exists.[/quote]
So you [i]know[/i] that something doesn't exist[b]s[/b]? You are able to prove a negative? That's impressive.
Since you are the one that is making the claim, it's your job to prove it. If you assert that "Jesus doesn't exist," then it's your job to provide evidence for his non-existence.
Let's make it more specific, starting by you answering my question. Why is the Bible unable to be counted as evidence for the historical person of Jesus Christ?
[quote]Here let me correct myself, I meant twoo suns.
"God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and god set them in the firmament to give light to the earth" (Gen 1:16-17)[/quote]
One would think that this is a no-brainer...One is the sun and the other is the moon. Though we do have the SAB complaint that "The moon isn't a light," but such a complaint is rather juvenile...It does reflect the sunlight, meaning it is a source of light we see though indirectly.
[quote]What does that mean for the New Testament accounts of the life of Jesus Christ? Does that mean they are immediately labeled as fiction? If you think so, then back up your answer with your methadology.[/quote]
If a person says they are the son of a God, that is not real, yes it makes the New Testament fiction. You can say "I need evidence" and I can give you contradictions and you'll never listen. But I want to see your evidence, but not using the NT. You ask why? Because theirs nothing but it that speaks of Jesus of Nazerth. Can I use the Koran as undenyable proof of Allah?
[quote]
Let's make it more specific, starting by you answering my question. Why is the Bible unable to be counted as evidence for the historical person of Jesus Christ?[/quote]
If the Bible is undobutly true, does that mean every book of every God is true? Like for example, the Gospel of the Flying Spagetti Monster is real?
[quote]Though we do have the SAB complaint that "The moon isn't a light," but such a complaint is rather juvenile...It does reflect the sunlight, meaning it is a source of light we see though indirectly.[/quote]
I honestly dont know what this was going to answer. This doesnt yet prove anything to me besides to know sinple science, which God doesnt.
[quote]One would think that this is a no-brainer...One is the sun and the other is the moon.[/quote]
Do you know how wrote the first five books of the OT? Mosses did. Mosses talked to God and he told him what to write, since God is all-knowing he used high tech words like "two suns" to represent the Sun and Moon. Hm. Why wouldnt he tell Mosses that the Moon isnt a star?
[quote]So you know that something doesn't exists? You are able to prove a negative? That's impressive.[/quote]
Yea I do. Heres an example, I know magic, flying dragons, Y2K Bug, Zesus, Hercules, Re, Remus, Romulus's she-wolf, and Bigfoot doesnt exists. I know Im impressive :).
[quote]Since you are the one that is making the claim, it's your job to prove it. If you assert that "Jesus doesn't exist," then it's your job to provide evidence for his non-existence[/quote]
And you are making the clam he exists, and I yet see any PHYSICAL evidence.