Create new topic
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)| Author | Message |
The Tomb of Jesus? I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think this is a wonderful opportunity for Christians to share the miracles we've seen in our own lives, as a result of following the Bible's teachings.
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm shocked there isn't all that much debate over this. The documentary claims to have DNA proof and the tomb's writing, etc and I just wonder if Christians have any real way of debating this or are just stuborn. It's hard for people to believe these things, even if just about everything was there to back it up...you can't have people just throw away their fate...yet some Christians expect this, nay, demand this of others in order to accept Jesus. Pretty interesting. I have to say my favorite comment out of all this is Howard Stern who said "Now everybody is Jewish!". | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
VinnyM27 said: I'm shocked there isn't all that much debate over this. The documentary claims to have DNA proof and the tomb's writing, etc and I just wonder if Christians have any real way of debating this or are just stuborn. It's hard for people to believe these things, even if just about everything was there to back it up...you can't have people just throw away their fate...yet some Christians expect this, nay, demand this of others in order to accept Jesus. Pretty interesting. I have to say my favorite comment out of all this is Howard Stern who said "Now everybody is Jewish!".
the only DNA proof is the box that says Mary isn't related by blood to the box that says Jesus. we have no idea if either one is the same from the Bible. it is necessary to help others, not only in our prayers, but in our daily lives. If we find we cannot help others, the least we can do is to desist from harming them.
Dalai Lama | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: VinnyM27 said: I'm shocked there isn't all that much debate over this. The documentary claims to have DNA proof and the tomb's writing, etc and I just wonder if Christians have any real way of debating this or are just stuborn. It's hard for people to believe these things, even if just about everything was there to back it up...you can't have people just throw away their fate...yet some Christians expect this, nay, demand this of others in order to accept Jesus. Pretty interesting. I have to say my favorite comment out of all this is Howard Stern who said "Now everybody is Jewish!".
the only DNA proof is the box that says Mary isn't related by blood to the box that says Jesus. we have no idea if either one is the same from the Bible. So what are the odds this sequence of names would appear on tombs at the time and in the place these tombs were buried? Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: ehuffnsd said: the only DNA proof is the box that says Mary isn't related by blood to the box that says Jesus. we have no idea if either one is the same from the Bible. So what are the odds this sequence of names would appear on tombs at the time and in the place these tombs were buried? Actually pretty high. "Jesus" or Yehoshua was a very common name in those days, as well as Mary. Any number of people could be buried under such a name. Jewish historian Josephus of the first century C.E. mentions some 12 persons, other than those in the Bible record (at least three), bearing that name. It also appears in the Apocryphal writings of the last centuries of the B.C.E. period. Even one of Mary's (Jesus' mother) ancestors was named Jesus (Luke 3:29). Shucks, go to any cemetary in Mexico -- plenty of Jesus' and Maria's there. How on EARTH would anyone be able to prove THE Jesus' DNA? Don't you need to have a completely verified source to compare it to? You can't even prove paternity to get child support without DNA from the father, mother and child. I don't see how this program could do anything to negatively affect the faith of one who knows what the Bible really teaches about Jesus' life, death and burial. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Uhope said: FunkshaII said: So what are the odds this sequence of names would appear on tombs at the time and in the place these tombs were buried? Actually pretty high. "Jesus" or Yehoshua was a very common name in those days, as well as Mary. Any number of people could be buried under such a name. Jewish historian Josephus of the first century C.E. mentions some 12 persons, other than those in the Bible record (at least three), bearing that name. It also appears in the Apocryphal writings of the last centuries of the B.C.E. period. Even one of Mary's (Jesus' mother) ancestors was named Jesus (Luke 3:29). Shucks, go to any cemetary in Mexico -- plenty of Jesus' and Maria's there. How on EARTH would anyone be able to prove THE Jesus' DNA? Don't you need to have a completely verified source to compare it to? You can't even prove paternity to get child support without DNA from the father, mother and child. I don't see how this program could do anything to negatively affect the faith of one who knows what the Bible really teaches about Jesus' life, death and burial. So basically your saying there is not way to prove or disprove whether this is the tomb of Jesus and Mary's family, thereby of no consequence to the validity of the Christian faith? Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: Uhope said: Actually pretty high. "Jesus" or Yehoshua was a very common name in those days, as well as Mary. Any number of people could be buried under such a name. Jewish historian Josephus of the first century C.E. mentions some 12 persons, other than those in the Bible record (at least three), bearing that name. It also appears in the Apocryphal writings of the last centuries of the B.C.E. period. Even one of Mary's (Jesus' mother) ancestors was named Jesus (Luke 3:29). Shucks, go to any cemetary in Mexico -- plenty of Jesus' and Maria's there. How on EARTH would anyone be able to prove THE Jesus' DNA? Don't you need to have a completely verified source to compare it to? You can't even prove paternity to get child support without DNA from the father, mother and child. I don't see how this program could do anything to negatively affect the faith of one who knows what the Bible really teaches about Jesus' life, death and burial. So basically your saying there is not way to prove or disprove whether this is the tomb of Jesus and Mary's family, thereby of no consequence to the validity of the Christian faith? Pretty much. Especially with the absence of bones... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: FunkshaII said: So basically your saying there is not way to prove or disprove whether this is the tomb of Jesus and Mary's family, thereby of no consequence to the validity of the Christian faith? Pretty much. Especially with the absence of bones... Seems one-sided, Christianity. Where's the proof of Christ's divinity? These tombs say a man named Jesus fathered an entire family with his wife Mary. Although the bible would lead us to believe Mary was an unclean heathen. Whose evidence is more believable? The tombs which provide hard evidence, or the bible, which is basically heresay...the so-called words of God translated into how many different versions? Hmmmm. Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ThreadBare said: FunkshaII said: So basically your saying there is not way to prove or disprove whether this is the tomb of Jesus and Mary's family, thereby of no consequence to the validity of the Christian faith? Pretty much. Especially with the absence of bones... Didn't they rebury the bones after they found the tomb? So if they really wanted they could test those, but really whats the point, DNA isn't going to prove that the dead guy was the son of god. And even if the bones turned out to be jesus and his body didn't go to heaven, people who believe in christ will find a reason to either disqualify the DNA results or reinterpret the scripture to fit their need to believe. "...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!" | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lazycrockett said: people who believe in christ will find a reason to either disqualify the DNA results or reinterpret the scripture to fit their need to believe.
You are so right. I find it ironic how the scriptures of the holy bible were used to justify slavery, the KKK and their white supremists ideology, and even now the slaughter and condemnation of thousands of American soliders and Iraqi citizens by our "born-again" Christian president. Makes me wonder at the tenacity of religious beliefs. Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
If there was undisputed proof the real tomb of Jesus and Mary were found would that effect your faith in Christianity and The Holy Bible? Watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, March 4, 2007 8:00 CST for James Cameron's documentary on the subject. [Edited 3/3/07 6:25am] LOL@ "diehard christians"... Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? for some the possibility could make his teachigs more meanigful ![]() | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: FunkshaII said: I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
If there was undisputed proof the real tomb of Jesus and Mary were found would that effect your faith in Christianity and The Holy Bible? Watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, March 4, 2007 8:00 CST for James Cameron's documentary on the subject. [Edited 3/3/07 6:25am] LOL@ "diehard christians"... Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? Why do you find the term diehard christians funny...I know quite a few, you don't? But seriously though, the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child would bring into question the resurrection of Jesus, a concept that is at the core of the Christian religion. For many Christians the concept of their sins being washed clean by the death and resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of their belief. To have this belief challenged with hard evidence is the question I'm asking. The teaching of the gospel of Jesus seems not to be as important as his death and resurrection...in some Christian circles. At least that's the way it seems to me in my dealing with some Christians. [Edited 3/4/07 14:59pm] Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: babynoz said: LOL@ "diehard christians"... Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? Why do you find the term diehard christians funny...I know quite a few, you don't? But seriously though, the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child would bring into question the resurrection of Jesus. [Edited 3/4/07 15:17pm] | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: babynoz said: LOL@ "diehard christians"... Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? Why do you find the term diehard christians funny...I know quite a few, you don't? But seriously though, the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child would bring into question the resurrection of Jesus, a concept that is at the core of the Christian religion. For many Christians the concept of their sins being washed clean by the death and resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of their belief. To have this belief challenged with hard evidence is the question I'm asking. The teaching of the gospel of Jesus seems not to be as important as his death and resurrection...in some Christian circles. At least that's the way it seems to me in my dealing with some Christians. [Edited 3/4/07 14:59pm] It's funny because I don't see fundamentalists as being any more or less "christian" than more moderate christians. Am I correct in asuming that you're referring to fundamentalists when you say die hards? If so, then don't make the mistake of thinking that they represent the epitome of christianity despite the fact that many proclaim such. And yes, I've run into quite a few. As to your other question, it's not the possibility of having a wife/child that would bring the resurrection into question, rather the possibility that somebody claims to have discovered the actual bones of Jesus himself, implying that he didn't rise from the dead. Is that what you mean??? "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: FunkshaII said: Why do you find the term diehard christians funny...I know quite a few, you don't? But seriously though, the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child would bring into question the resurrection of Jesus, a concept that is at the core of the Christian religion. For many Christians the concept of their sins being washed clean by the death and resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of their belief. To have this belief challenged with hard evidence is the question I'm asking. The teaching of the gospel of Jesus seems not to be as important as his death and resurrection...in some Christian circles. At least that's the way it seems to me in my dealing with some Christians. [Edited 3/4/07 14:59pm] It's funny because I don't see fundamentalists as being any more or less "christian" than more moderate christians. Am I correct in asuming that you're referring to fundamentalists when you say die hards? If so, then don't make the mistake of thinking that they represent the epitome of christianity despite the fact that many proclaim such. And yes, I've run into quite a few. As to your other question, it's not the possibility of having a wife/child that would bring the resurrection into question, rather the possibility that somebody claims to have discovered the actual bones of Jesus himself, implying that he didn't rise from the dead. Is that what you mean??? Well sort of. If Jesus had a wife and family, would that not call into question his divinity and emphasize his more human attributes? At least that is what one coworker who reads his bible daily told me. How could Jesus be the manifestation of God in human form if he was more human and god? Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: babynoz said: It's funny because I don't see fundamentalists as being any more or less "christian" than more moderate christians. Am I correct in asuming that you're referring to fundamentalists when you say die hards? If so, then don't make the mistake of thinking that they represent the epitome of christianity despite the fact that many proclaim such. And yes, I've run into quite a few. As to your other question, it's not the possibility of having a wife/child that would bring the resurrection into question, rather the possibility that somebody claims to have discovered the actual bones of Jesus himself, implying that he didn't rise from the dead. Is that what you mean??? Well sort of. If Jesus had a wife and family, would that not call into question his divinity and emphasize his more human attributes? At least that is what one coworker who reads his bible daily told me. How could Jesus be the manifestation of God in human form if he was more human and god? Oh, I think I get what you're saying now. The key word is manifestation in "human" form. Just as we are told that he ate, drank, and bled like humans, I think we can assume that the rest of him functioned as a human also. Whether he chose to avail himself of these functions is another question altogether. IMO it doesn't call into question any of his divine attributes because I don't see the two as being mutually exclusive. "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkshaII said: I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
If there was undisputed proof the real tomb of Jesus and Mary were found would that effect your faith in Christianity and The Holy Bible? Watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, March 4, 2007 8:00 CST for James Cameron's documentary on the subject. [Edited 3/3/07 6:25am] No, because there can be no conclusive proof. Plus the facts don't agree with what is recorded in the Bible. Plus this news and the tombs discovery has been around for many years and has never generated any interest until now. Perhaps the fictional Davinci Code movie sparked this new hypothesis? Anyone could inscribe some names on some tombs, throw some bones in from some family and bury it to be found some time later to try and discredit what really happened. I mean someone from around the time of Jesus' death or shortly after. I wouldn't put it past old Herod to have done the deed. He was a very shrewd character. He even went so far as to have his own family members murdered. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Nevertheless I'll be watching...should be amusing. "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I had a kid ask me about this during the children's sermon today. I told him that I would have to see the documentary first.
A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on progress of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."-MLK, Jr. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i just find it ironic that it wasn't an Atheist that made this discovery
I am a Rail Road, Track Abandoned
With the Sunset forgetting, i ever Happened myspace.com/davidoutting | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Eternaldragon said: FunkshaII said: I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
If there was undisputed proof the real tomb of Jesus and Mary were found would that effect your faith in Christianity and The Holy Bible? Watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, March 4, 2007 8:00 CST for James Cameron's documentary on the subject. [Edited 3/3/07 6:25am] No, because there can be no conclusive proof. Plus the facts don't agree with what is recorded in the Bible. Plus this news and the tombs discovery has been around for many years and has never generated any interest until now. Perhaps the fictional Davinci Code movie sparked this new hypothesis? Anyone could inscribe some names on some tombs, throw some bones in from some family and bury it to be found some time later to try and discredit what really happened. I mean someone from around the time of Jesus' death or shortly after. I wouldn't put it past old Herod to have done the deed. He was a very shrewd character. He even went so far as to have his own family members murdered. actually everything the documentery said was pretty much insync with the bible and other noncanon-based gospels, that weren't excepted during the constantine created commitee to make the current cannonized bible. We gotta remember that the earliest copt of the gospels we have is luke and thats in greek and hat dates back to the the 3rd century which basically means the text was probably tampered with and changed from its original hebrew/aramaic text not to mention influence from the so called "apostle" paul so the bible speaks in riddles but to a keen studyer everything the documentery proclaimed is pretty much on key, jesus having brothers and sisters etc.. nobody is debating whether its insync with the bible or not it most def is in sync which is what makes it fascninating the real question is whether its real... and there is only one way to find out that its real, and thats to gentically test every ossuary to see if tehy're blood relatives, excluding mary magdelene if they are, the probability factor is undeniable... what we have to ask ourselves here does this discovery, true or not, really change the face of christianity? is the ressurection, that necessary to the christian faith? can it survive without it... cause the general bias we all have religious or not will determine whether we can handle it... we've spent two thousand years building this large monument of jesus... more than half the world are christians... so if the ressurection story is necessary, that would mean than more than half the world need to know that those bones are not jesus... that bias is undeniable... but we have to realize as a species sooner or later, that their comes a time we have to stop beliving in fantasies to compensate for our own emotional crutches. thats why this is extremely important, to seperate the fact from the fiction, and hold true what really matters and thats what jesus taught, not how he died and supposedly acended to heaven this ha snothing to do with a belief in god or faith... this has to do with the probability factor that it could be jesus in that tomb... and there is one... and we have to examine it further, but im almost positive that it will just be ignored, probably 200 years later when the species is less religiously sensitive, they'll reopen and examine it further... but hey who knows your life is not really effected, keep believing what youw ant to believe I am a Rail Road, Track Abandoned
With the Sunset forgetting, i ever Happened myspace.com/davidoutting | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: FunkshaII said: Well sort of. If Jesus had a wife and family, would that not call into question his divinity and emphasize his more human attributes? At least that is what one coworker who reads his bible daily told me. How could Jesus be the manifestation of God in human form if he was more human and god? Oh, I think I get what you're saying now. The key word is manifestation in "human" form. Just as we are told that he ate, drank, and bled like humans, I think we can assume that the rest of him functioned as a human also. Whether he chose to avail himself of these functions is another question altogether. IMO it doesn't call into question any of his divine attributes because I don't see the two as being mutually exclusive. Well personally, the divinity of Jesus is not the foundation of my faith in his gospel either. But for the Catholic Church and the papal concept it is imperative. According to the bible Simon Peter was the head of the Christian church, but to entice the masses that indeed the pope is the seat of church authority, the divinity of Jesus and his subsequent appointment of Simon Peter as the head of the church is the foundation of Catholism. Without this divine authority would the Vatican be the most powerful and richest church on the face of the planet? I think not. It is my opinion the discovery of the tomb of Jesus invalidates the authority of the Catholic church and it's claim to such an authority. Let's not forget the Vatacian is one of the richest entities in the world with the power to control millions of people. I do not doubt that Jesus held the power of God for I call on his name and give thanks regularly, however I do not need the authoritative power of an organized entity or the half truths of bibical scriptures to regulate my faith. Inside of Me, I am Free, Free to be Me. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Eternaldragon said: FunkshaII said: I've been asking diehard Christians a question which I will put forth here:
If there was undisputed proof the real tomb of Jesus and Mary were found would that effect your faith in Christianity and The Holy Bible? Watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, March 4, 2007 8:00 CST for James Cameron's documentary on the subject. No, because there can be no conclusive proof. just like the Bible can never have conclusive proof The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology. - Michael Parenti | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: LOL@ "diehard christians"... Seriously though, why would the possibility of Jesus having a wife and/or child affect the truth of his teachings??? I hear this phrasing often and have nodded, shrugged or simply pass it off, but then I'm beginning to wonder what do people really mean when they say "the teaching of Jesus". I mean are you saying that we should love one another? Which is all good and fine, but what does that mean? What Webster says it mean? I am quite curious what people really have in mind when they say "the teaching of Jesus". Anyone care to elaborate? Never again, not I. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
my grandma appeared to me after she died
GIT THAT CORN OUTTA MY FACE!!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I didn't watch the whole thing. Something else had my attention at the time. But from what I've gathered, only the tombs or ossiaries or whatever they are found in this place were only those who have been named in the scriptures, correct? No sisters were found with names, though the scripture does mention sisters? And the only DNA available was that of the supposed Jesus & Mary, but none of the supposed son of Jesus, so no maternity or paternity test could be done, And the brothers' tombs, did they have wives buried with them, since none of that is ever mentioned in the scriptures about them having wives or anything. Just some thoughts. Never again, not I. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
morningsong said: I didn't watch the whole thing. Something else had my attention at the time. But from what I've gathered, only the tombs or ossiaries or whatever they are found in this place were only those who have been named in the scriptures, correct? No sisters were found with names, though the scripture does mention sisters? And the only DNA available was that of the supposed Jesus & Mary, but none of the supposed son of Jesus, so no maternity or paternity test could be done, And the brothers' tombs, did they have wives buried with them, since none of that is ever mentioned in the scriptures about them having wives or anything. Just some thoughts.
these are the ossiaries I remember they found: Joseph and Mary Jesus son of joseph Mary Magdalen Jose I think he was the son of jesus and James son of joseph brother of jesus GIT THAT CORN OUTTA MY FACE!!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
So only Jesus' "wife" is buried in the tomb, but the other 5 brothers must have pulled a "Thornbird" and sat home twiddling their thumbs till they died, and the sisters just fell off the face of the earth? Sounds so selective. Never again, not I. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Create new topic
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)