H
havemercy
Guest
Does he go on tangents about how the Church “demonized” sex in the Middle Ages too? If so, then we have something in common other than the faith.
- Status
S
Sina
Guest
Can you believe this is in the news again? And during Lent, again.
M
mchale
Guest
Well Time Magazine is debunking this now:
time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1593893,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner
Obviously the big question is, if the case was so compelling, how come it is being revealed on a documentary on the Discovery Channel and not being made in the most prestigious peer reviewed journals. Particularly since this tomb has been known for 20 years.
I don’t think the tomb is a hoax, and I don’t think the interpretation is either… I do think however it is wrong. At the very least, with the evidence revealed so far, the evidence is filled with huge leaps (such as the one Mary being Jesus’s wife). In fact to some regard, the film makers seem to have started with the story they wanted to tell and then found evidence that supports that story… which is not science by a long shot.
–
Bill
time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1593893,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner
Obviously the big question is, if the case was so compelling, how come it is being revealed on a documentary on the Discovery Channel and not being made in the most prestigious peer reviewed journals. Particularly since this tomb has been known for 20 years.
I don’t think the tomb is a hoax, and I don’t think the interpretation is either… I do think however it is wrong. At the very least, with the evidence revealed so far, the evidence is filled with huge leaps (such as the one Mary being Jesus’s wife). In fact to some regard, the film makers seem to have started with the story they wanted to tell and then found evidence that supports that story… which is not science by a long shot.
–
Bill
F
Faith1960
Guest
According to this Time article, the name “Jose” is “a name that appears in the Bible as that of one of Jesus’s brothers.” Catholic teaching is clear that Jesus had no siblings and that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life so I don’t think we should automatically jump to agree with something Time is saying, just because they’re now disagreeing with James Cameron’s claims. Hasn’t Time published stories in the past that contradicts what we believe?
On a side note, where in the Bible does it say Jesus had siblings, much less a brother named Jose?
M
mschrank
Guest
Can anyone confirm the details about the stats?
Is it really statistically difficult to make the case against Cameron’s documentary?
Is it really statistically difficult to make the case against Cameron’s documentary?
N
Nullasalus
Guest
Not really, no. Really, consider it - why go to a statistician to find out whether or not it’s unusual to find names of that mix in the crypt?
The answer is, apparently, because Cameron doesn’t get the answer he’d prefer if he goes to an appropriate archaeologist or historian. From the Time article linked above:
“The idea was eventually discounted, however, because, as University of St. Andrews (Scotland) New Testament expert Richard Bauckham asserted in a subsequent book, the names with Biblical resonance are so common that even when you run the probabilities on the group, the odds of it being the famous Jesus’s family are “very low.””
And later…
"St. Andrews’ Bauckham defends his probabilities, noting that Jacobovici was comparing his name-cluster to the rather small sampling of names known to have been found on bone boxes, while his own basis for comparison, which adds names from contemporary literature and other sources, makes the combo far less unusual. "
As far as Jesus’ brothers go, I could be wrong, but I believe Catholic teaching is that those ‘brothers’ in the bible could be either cousins, or Joseph’s children by a previous marriage? Someone else will have to clear that up though.
Either way, the fact the way Cameron is playing this smells funny - it has to, if even Time’s website is questioning it. A whole lot of showmanship and little else.
2
2shelbys
Guest
It is child’s play to completely debunk it. It was debunked over 25 years ago when this tomb was first discovered. The archaeologist that led the discovery has called the claim impossible and nonsense. He said that the ossuary they are identifying as that of Jesus actually bears the name Hanun, not Yeshua. Neither the tomb itself nor it’s location would be consistant with this supposed family of Jesus. It goes on and on. The parade of scholars calling this nonsense is very long and only beginning to be covered in the media. And remember, Cameron’s partner in this is Simcha Jacobovici, who was a major player in the last fake Jesus-related ossuary fiasco. What they consider their best piece of evidence, the supposed statistical improbability of finding a similar grouping of names (ignoring the devastating fact that Yeshua is not one of them, which trashes their whole claim immediately) in one tomb of the period is not even something that can be reliably calculated unless you know the one key piece of information necessary for such a calculation: exactly how numerically common were those names at that time in history. Unless they have an accurate census of the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the surrounding area from the period their statistics are nothing more than an unfounded guess. Every serious scholar directly connected to the site has stated at one time or another that this claim is nonsense and many of them are Jewish and therefore have no ulterior motive to protect Christianity. It is just another pathetic attempt to damage Christianity and it would be laughable if there were no Christians un-informed enough to think it may be true.
2
2shelbys
Guest
If I am correct, Church teaching and linguistic knowledge indicate that the term interpreted as “brother” was not merely a reference to a sibling or a relative at all and that anyone close to you could be referred to using that term. All of the Apostles and anyone else close to Jesus would have been referred to in this manner. Jesus had no siblings, period. He did have a rather famous cousin though.
M
mchale
Guest
Well, a couple of thoughts here. To begin with, I don’t think we need to “agree” with everything that Time wrote here. I was merely pointing out another point in the popular media that is finding Cameron’s claims to be less than fully credible.According to this Time article, the name “Jose” is “a name that appears in the Bible as that of one of Jesus’s brothers.” Catholic teaching is clear that Jesus had no siblings and that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life so I don’t think we should automatically jump to agree with something Time is saying, just because they’re now disagreeing with James Cameron’s claims. Hasn’t Time published stories in the past that contradicts what we believe?
On a side note, where in the Bible does it say Jesus had siblings, much less a brother named Jose?
In addition, the Bible does make some references to “brothers” of Jesus. The Catholic Church, I believe, generally teaches that the word translated as brother actually means kinsman and so could also indicated members of Jesus’s extended family. In addition, the Eastern Orthodox Church has a tradition that Joseph was an older man that was widower with children before marrying Mary and that these children are the brother’s of Jesus.
–
Bill
R
reason
Guest
I don’t think there’s absolute proof of anything. But there is such a thing as preponderance of evidence (including very serious, scientifically-derived evidence, not to mention tons of serious scholarship). I’ll put that up against superstitious faith and absurd dogmas any day. Please don’t bother to tell me that there’s history in the New Testament. I am incapable of understanding how anyone can truly have read that document and still believe it’s the word of a god (and let’s not even get into the insanities and evil of the OT). If so, you must only be reading and studying very selective parts of it.
You want to see a miracle? Just look around you. We live in a miracle. A miracle is a quarterback who can accurately throw a football 50 yards to where a receiver is going to be when the ball gets there, and it’s immediately followed by the miracle of the receiver actually catching this projectile. A miracle is a child being able to ride a bicycle. A miracle is science being able to heal and extend life. A miracle is any one of us thinking of something and then making it happen. We all need look no further. But that doesn’t mean there’s a god behind them. We are all god together. Even if there is a god behind it all (and it would have to be an infinite god, not the finite god of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition), such a being would not require worship and adoration from anyone. It would be happy if everyone just followed the golden rule.
You want to see a miracle? Just look around you. We live in a miracle. A miracle is a quarterback who can accurately throw a football 50 yards to where a receiver is going to be when the ball gets there, and it’s immediately followed by the miracle of the receiver actually catching this projectile. A miracle is a child being able to ride a bicycle. A miracle is science being able to heal and extend life. A miracle is any one of us thinking of something and then making it happen. We all need look no further. But that doesn’t mean there’s a god behind them. We are all god together. Even if there is a god behind it all (and it would have to be an infinite god, not the finite god of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition), such a being would not require worship and adoration from anyone. It would be happy if everyone just followed the golden rule.
H
havemercy
Guest
You should write a Bible.
M
mchale
Guest
Just curious, but how exactly is this post relevant to the topic at hand? The documentary in question has serious problems with it, and not merely from a religious perspective. If scholars had thought that the tomb in question was linked to the Biblical Jesus, the evidence would have been in serious Journals of Archeology and Biblical Studies long before.
Now, regarding the New Testament. Obviously you are not trained in History if you think that the New Testament can be disregarded as an historical document. While you can certainly deny the claims from within it, but to deny it at as historical document would be a mistake.
–
Bill
M
mchale
Guest
As a secular humanist, you shouldn’t be ascribing to miracles, what should be ascribed to evolution or physics or modern medicine. By definition a miracle comes from outside what we are capable of.
In any case, if you think that the Judeo-Christian God is a finite God, you clearly don’t understand Christian teachings or Theology at all.
–
Bill
B
BobCatholic
Guest
Well, the fart left (misspelling intentional) seem to hate the idea of people making money off of religion just as much as religionIf it is true then I call for a liquidation of all Church assets and we can all go chill.
But Wait! Even my friends at the Far left liberal media are helping to de-bunk this one…Could it be ?:
abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=nation_world&id=5069377
B
BobCatholic
Guest
You mean like there’s no absolute proof that God does not exist?
Wonderful.
Answer me this, Batman:
- What is the chemical formula for love?
- Using the laws of mathematics, please calculate for me the meaning of life. Please show your work.
- Using logic, please refute Thomas Aquinas five proofs of the existence of God.
- Please determine the logical reason why a corporation which is not a human being is entitled to human rights but an unborn child who is human, is not entitled to human rights.
- Using logic, please prove that relativism is true, and make sure you deal with the rule of non-contradiction.
- If a secular leftwinger and a moral theologian were to have a friendly debate on abortion, using the laws of physics, please calculate the speed of which the secular leftwinger will run away from this after having his pro-abortion arguments trounced.
- Using the laws of science, please determine who is worthy of human rights.
- What is the chemical formula of moral correctness?
- Using the scientific method, please determine what is the correct moral code of the scientific community?
- Using the rules of science, please determine why someone should be unselfish.
- Using the rules of science, please determine why someone should be loving.
You mean like the superstition that there is no God? The dogma that atheism is not a religion? The dogma that an unborn is not a human being that is worthy of human rights? That humans are only animals?
Then please change your username to something other than “reason”.
I’m still waiting for science to heal mental illness. And answer the questions I just asked you earlier.
Excellent.
Please determine this using the scientific method. What is the chemical formula of the Golden rule? Maybe the laws of physics can answer this.
Natural science cannot explain the supernatural, whose existence is filled in our lives. That list of miracles you listed, proves it.
In fact, natural science is quickly going into the area of the supernatural sciences like philosophy and theology.
A great example: String Theory. Whoa. A lot of string theory is accepted on faith.
R
reason
Guest
My last post is relevant because everyone else here is dismissing the evidence out of hand without even considering it. They offer no factual counterarguments outside of the NT itself (and it’s just child’s play to shoot holes in that).
That this archeological site was found in the early 80’s and dismissed back then means nothing. It doesn’t seem that long ago, but those days were before the Bible scholarship of the previous few hundred years became more widely known and accessible, before much of what we know now from the dead sea scrolls, etc.
That this archeological site was found in the early 80’s and dismissed back then means nothing. It doesn’t seem that long ago, but those days were before the Bible scholarship of the previous few hundred years became more widely known and accessible, before much of what we know now from the dead sea scrolls, etc.
No, it’s not accepted on faith. It’s a theory. An avenue open for thought and exploration. Science does not work on the basis of faith, but rather on that of curiosity and the drive to understand. We progress by testing our various theories until they are disproved. Religion is the opposite of that. It refuses to test itself. Instead, any newly perceived problem is rationalized to fit the existing theology. If it was up to most of the world’s religions, including Christianity, we would still be living in the world of 2000 years ago.
M
Matthewd777
Guest
Let me say a little something about the words “What-If?”
Look on the back of Michael Baigent’s book - “The Jesus Papers” Every bullet point on the back starts with the two words “What-If?”
Take a look at the trailer for the Da Vinci Code film, it starts with “What-If?” There are two types of “What-If?” thoughts, there are those that can drive someone towards goodness, such as “What if i could rise above my problems and claim victory over them?” or “What if i could raise enough money to help many homeless people have some food to eat?” then there are the fearful types, such as “What if all of this Jesus stuff is all made up, and we’ve been lied to all of these years?” or “What if there is another way to Heaven besides Jesus and nobody has told us yet?” These types of fearful questionings cause one to doubt the faith and doubt God’s word.
Let’s take a look at who caused Adam and Eve to doubt God’s word. Satan. My friends, the greatest trick he has ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn’t exist. Do not be blindsided by his attacks and tricks. They don’t call him the serpent for nothing for he is very cunning and deceitful. He caused Adam and Eve to question what God said in the Garden of Eden, and enticed them with “another way” other than what God said. Picture yourself in their position, think about what they might have heard in their mind from Satan after God told them they’d die after going after the forbidden fruit, i.e. “What if God really didn’t mean that you’d die, what if you misunderstood him? What if we really could become Gods?” Just something to think about. Keep the faith, and never give in. God Bless you all.
Look on the back of Michael Baigent’s book - “The Jesus Papers” Every bullet point on the back starts with the two words “What-If?”
Take a look at the trailer for the Da Vinci Code film, it starts with “What-If?” There are two types of “What-If?” thoughts, there are those that can drive someone towards goodness, such as “What if i could rise above my problems and claim victory over them?” or “What if i could raise enough money to help many homeless people have some food to eat?” then there are the fearful types, such as “What if all of this Jesus stuff is all made up, and we’ve been lied to all of these years?” or “What if there is another way to Heaven besides Jesus and nobody has told us yet?” These types of fearful questionings cause one to doubt the faith and doubt God’s word.
Let’s take a look at who caused Adam and Eve to doubt God’s word. Satan. My friends, the greatest trick he has ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn’t exist. Do not be blindsided by his attacks and tricks. They don’t call him the serpent for nothing for he is very cunning and deceitful. He caused Adam and Eve to question what God said in the Garden of Eden, and enticed them with “another way” other than what God said. Picture yourself in their position, think about what they might have heard in their mind from Satan after God told them they’d die after going after the forbidden fruit, i.e. “What if God really didn’t mean that you’d die, what if you misunderstood him? What if we really could become Gods?” Just something to think about. Keep the faith, and never give in. God Bless you all.
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Non-believers always use the language of speculation. I saw an episode of ‘the way of the master’ that was about evolution. Evolutionists’, when challenged about specifics, always resort to the language of speculation.
“we presume…we think…possibly…maybe”
I’m seeing a pattern here with people trying to disprove the gospel/God’s word and the language of speculation.
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
“we presume…we think…possibly…maybe”
I’m seeing a pattern here with people trying to disprove the gospel/God’s word and the language of speculation.
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
B
BobCatholic
Guest
As you have done the same. You’ve dismissed my questions without even considering them.
Pot. Kettle.
Actually, if you actually READ the archeological arguments and non-NT arguments in this thread (something you conveniently ignored…) you would not have said this.
Really?
Please use the scientific method and prove it. From what I saw on TV about string theory (on the Science Channel) - it looks too much like philosophy.
I’m noticing that a lot of “natural science” is quickly heading into the area of philosophy, which is a supernatural science. This is an admission that the natural is not all there is in the universe.
Actually, thanks to Christianity, namely the Catholic Church, we have universities. We invented them. It was the Catholic Church who funded scientific studies (look at Copernicus!) It was the Catholic Church who helped develop western civilization out of the dark ages of human existence. Thanks to the Catholic Church, we went from the barbarism of the Roman Empire to modern society.
But hey, remember, you have an anti-Christian bias. Please change your username to something other than “reason” as it doesn’t properly reflect your position. There’s nothing reasonable about being anti-Christian.
B
BobCatholic
Guest
And blind faith.
Proof: Just as your favorite secularist why an unborn child is not a human being when science says the he/she is a human being.
THEN they at the same time accuse us of blind faith
- Status