American Uproar Over Jesus's Tomb

Discussion in 'Your Bloody Soap Box' started by Carrera, Feb 28, 2007.

  1. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    If anyone has serious objections, I don't mind dropping this thread as it may be too offensive but I thought maybe I'd test the waters and see what people think.
    The fact is I just got back from another website where it seems some people are in uproar over this tomb of Jesus that's been discovered. In the U.S.A. especially, there is real anger directed against James Cameron and his team over the discovery of this tomb and the idea Jesus fathered a son called Judah.
    What worries me is we're witnessing the same kind of irrational reaction to these claims as you witness in Iran (for example when Salmon Rushdie published his book). Americans are simply digging in their heels, covering their ears, yelling the words "fraud", "liar" "sham!" but do we see these folks even reading the evidence or making any rational defence?
    Nope!
    I'm sorry folks but there is plenty of evidence to suggest the scientists and archeologists are now hot on the heels of the 3 world religions, discovering texts the Church wanted to destroy and exposing insertions, distortions and mistranslations in all these ancient texts.
    The Da Vinci code, we are told, is just a fantasy story - the author himself backs down probably due to the uproar.
    Nope, that's not quite the case. The Da Vinci code may have been exaggerated to make a good novel but it's also based on a certain amount of fact taken from the rediscovered coptic manuscripts that offer a new perspective of Jesus. For example, this extract taken from a coptic text that refers to Mary Magdalene:
    "That is why He (Jesus) loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect Man, and separate as He commanded us and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Savior said."
    As for the tomb, this is currently being debated with claim and counter claim. However, there's a good deal of evidence to suggest Jesus did have family, did read Hebrew scriptures in Jewish synagogues and, more to the point, ancient sources outside of the Bible paid little attention to the claims made by the early Christians about Jesus's burial.
    Even hotter evidence is exposing the void between early Christianity and what the Church began to teach as orthodoxy around 300 A.D. Did Jesus really teach the doctrine the Church claimed he taught or has there been a huge cover up, a series of distortians and outright deceit?
     
    Tags:


  2. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    As we speak, there is an angry mob marching down my street. They have an emblazened effigy of James Cameron and are demanding he be executed immediately.

    Seriously though, this is basically tabloid news in the USA. Don't let a few people from a website sway you into believing this is a critical topic here. Next...
     
  3. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmm, but it's been going on for some time in America. Even John Lennon feared assassination after he made his comments about Jesus and you had these Southern mobs burning Beatle records.
    James Cameron is in a whole heapload of trouble and hasn't he just rocked the boat!!
    The problem with religion (all religion) is this modus operandi of the belief system which rejects rational analysis. The nitty gritty of the matter is these evangelical churches teach their adherents that "doubt" (i.e. rational investigation") is "Satanic" or "of the Devil".
    It's a convenient way to simply step back and state, "I believe no matter what anyone else says!" You see no attempt to even address the issue.
    I recall an interview on T.V. between a BBC journalist and a Bush Administration neo conservative advisor. The journalist spent 30 minutes explaining how ancient Greek and Hebrew texts differed from one another textually and how certain paragraphs were either juggled, reinserted or modified.
    The Bush guy simply replied he believed in the total word of God and that was that. End of story.

     
  4. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is growing anger. Take this comment:
    "If the Discovery Channel fails to cancel this slanderous documentary, it will have to explain why it is intentionally misleading the public," Brent Bozell, president of the conservative watchdog group Media Research Center, told the trade. "They should be embarrassed by this plunge into sensational speculation masquerading as science. The Discovery Channel will have dug its own grave if it doesn't pull this documentary."
     
  5. cheapie

    cheapie New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    847
    Likes Received:
    0
    i haven't seen anything on the issue. i think i recall something a while ago but i just searched most of the big news outlets and nothing came up on their homepage.

    oh wait. here's something: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Entertainment/story?id=2905662&page=1


    yup. us americans are going ape over this. woohoo! get out the pitchforks and start the tar boiling and go git us some chickens. we're going to need the feathers!

    :rolleyes: sometimes you might want to step back and see if your claims are based in reality...oops. just a sec. someone just sent me a meeting request for a jihad kaizen event. it's on baby!!!!
     
  6. sogood

    sogood New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rocking the foundation of a person or a group's theological belief can bring out the worst in a person or group. :D
     
  7. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is no news in America....... Good tabloid news.
     
  8. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Basically I'm not an atheist. Neither do I deny Jesus Christ existed or that there isn't a certain amount of accuracy in the Bible.
    Neither is Cameron's claim beyond doubt since it's very open to debate.
    What I do detect, though, is this gap between the actual teachings of Jesus Christ and the official doctrine of the Church that was established after a lot of argument, fragmentation, wrangling and discord, some 250 years after the crucifixion.
    I do know the very early Christians never really had a "creed" and varied in what they believed. Not all of them believed Jesus was equal to Yahweh or that Yahweh was even equal to Jesus. Some believed gentiles should be circumcised, others believed gentiles should follow the Torah and not all groups accepted the Hebrew scripts as canon.
    At some point the Church decided upon an Orthodox doctrine and proclaimed the other branches of Christianity as heresy. Books such as the Gospel Of Mary were likewise rejected.



     
  9. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's because we all know we will die and we all know we're born and die. Logically we have to make some sense out of it all.
    I often joke that if my dog was the dominant species on Earth, he would have his particular theory with respect to how we all got here. There would be images of canines in Churches and accounts of the Great Pooch who created dogs after his own image.
    Mankind was, of course, made subject to pooches.
    Just so much as suggest the world wasn't created by a pooch and he'd bite you and quote from his Holy Scripture that all life was created by a pooch in 6 days.

     
  10. garyj

    garyj New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm more active and involved in a local church than most people. I meet and deal with "church people" every day. I've yet to hear any mention of the "Jesus tomb" book or documentary. I also believe it's tabloid journalism at this point. Most people are not aware of the historical and archeological issues involved. There is no real evidence this information should change what anyone believes.
     
  11. bkaapcke

    bkaapcke New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    If it proves out to be Jesus' tomb, It'll be fun watching the more hard core christians try to explainn it away. The BS will really fly. I can't wait. bk

    Christian History Completely Discredits The Word.
     
  12. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115

    Early Christianity is an interesting topic.

    It is accepted that Jesus Christ existed - both in an historical sense and in terms of faith.
    Historically, there are records which show that Jesus Christ existed.
    The fork in the road appears when the issue of faith is introduced and whether or not people choose to believe that Jesus Christ is (the Son of) God.

    The early Christian Church (AD 50 - AD 200) from it's inception was at pains to decide if it was a Judeo-Christian group, or a Christian-Judeo group.
    That early debate centred around the issue of whether or not the new Christian Church would be based upon Judaism or one which was completely new and separate.
    St.Paul and St.Peter argued over this - for example, could a Gentile be converted to the new Christian Church, did one have to be circumcised to join the new Church, were the dietary customs of the Old Religion applicable to Christianity.
    This debate raged for many years.

    The question of orthodoxy was established initially at the Council of Nicea approx 300 years after the death of Jesus.
    Nicea ruled on issue such as the Divinity of Jesus Christ and it tried to bring a consensus to what had been in place, throughout different locations, for the first two centuries after the death of Jesus Christ.
     
  13. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    With regard to Cameron - I think he's drawing the wrong conclusion from what he thinks he may have found.

    Not that I have followed to story in any great detail - but I heard an interview yesterday in which Tony Robinson (of Channel 4's Time Team - and the guy who played Baldrick in Blackadder) said that this same "tomb" had been first found in 1996.

    So the story of Cameron discovering it - appears to be publicity.

    It's a bit like Cameron's Titanic - it wasn't a great film and it was a pale imitation
    of the better (and more accurate) earlier 1953 film "A Night to Remember".
     
  14. Bro Deal

    Bro Deal New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    2
    This is incorrect. There is nothing that is even close to being contemporary with Jesus. The most common reference is Tacitus, but Tacitus was born a generation after Jesus' death and the passage he wrote that references Jesus was written nearly a century after Jesus' death. Authors like Josephus, also born after Jesus' death, seem to be simply repeating the Christian mythology instead of drawing from legitimate earlier records. On top of that there are serious questions about the authenticity of sources like Tacitus and Josephus. In other cases sources that are sometimes siezed upon as proof, refer to persons with the name "Chrestus" which was a common name, and obviously not the Christ in question.

    All New Testament writings were produced decades after Jesus' death. The oldest is Mark, dated at 30 - 40 years after Jesus, and the resurrection ending was added later; it does not exist in the earlier copies. The newer gospels not only obviously steal from earlier accounts, they expand upon and "enhance" them. Changes and omissions in the gospels is a fascinating topic.
     
  15. garyj

    garyj New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you feel that the reference to "Chrestus" "obviously" could not refer to Christ, then it follows that most of the recorded names found in the "Jesus Tomb" could not be those referenced in the New Testament documents, because their spellings do not match those of our day and language either. Your logic rebuts the Jesus Tomb book and documentary.

    You are not correct on the Mark 16 comment. It is the section of Mark verses 9-20 that are not included in the earliest texts, not the entire chapter. You will find "resurrection" mentioned in all earlier manuscripts (v.6 for example).

    I'm not sure how "close to contemporary" you believe historical documents/investigation need be. We are drawing conclusions from the assassination of JFK over 40 years ago and Martin Luther King Jr years ago, and it's pretty clear that 2000 years from now we will be considered contempories of those events. In fact, we may be getting it more correct than they did immediately after the event.
     
  16. Bro Deal

    Bro Deal New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    2
    I said nothing about the tomb. I referred to supposed references in the historical record that have been tied to Jesus by the name "Chrestus" even though that name was extremely common and the references are obviously do not refer to Jesus. People are willing to grasp at straws to back their beliefs.

    As far as the tomb goes, it looks to be a fraud being sensationalized for the almighty buck.

    I never said the entire chapter was added. Specificially there is a difference between saying the tomb was empty with someone claiming Jesus had been resurrected and saying his disciples kicked back and chowed down with the resurrected Jesus. Those added twelve verses change things quite a bit. And that just points to the major problem with the gospels as evidence. Aside from being written forty to sixty years after Jesus' death, they have been doctored to reflect the beliefs of christianity at the time of the writing; and that contradicts one of the benefits of comtemporary evidence in the first place.

    Contemporary means what it means. Accounts by people who lived at the same time and, presumably, have first hand knowledge. In two thousand years we will be able to examine records made during the 1950s and 1960s and find overwhelming numbers of references to Kennedy and his assassination. Even though Jesus had, according to the gospels, a huge following that flocked to hear him speak, there exists not a shred of proof in Jewish or Roman records. Everything comes from hearsay, which was record at least forty to sixy years after Jesus was gone.

    It should not be surprising that nothing exists to prove Jesus existed. We are talking about events that happened two thousand years ago, and a man who at the time was a nobody. Just because his followers would eventually grow into a worldwide religion does not make him important to anyone who dealt with him when he was alive. Huge amounts of writings from Roman times have disappeared, unfortunately. We don't have the memoirs of Sulla, one of the most important men in Roman history; so why should we expect to have a record of one of many self proclaimed prophets in a province of the Roman empire?
     
  17. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    I disagree.

    It is accepted, historically, that Jesus of Nazareth, did exist.
    Josephus and other Jewish chroniclers of the time attest to the fact that he did in fact exist.

    If people choose not to believe that Jesus of Nazareth of Christ, then that is a different matter.
    But historically, factually, it is accepted that Jesus existed and that he lived.
     
  18. garyj

    garyj New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    The tomb is the subject of this thread. I assumed you were addressing that. And yes, I agree, you are grasping at straws, but don't feel bad, I find myself doing that at times as well.

    On this I think we agree.


    You said the "resurrection ending." Resurrection is not mentioned in the verses you reference. It is found before that. The section you mention is the "commission" ending (see v.15).

    It's interesting that a "nobody" has had more historical influence than anybody else I am aware of in history- including "one of the most important men in Roman history" - Sulla. Sulla who? We do not live in the Year of Sulla, 2007.

    I agree, "huge amounts of writings from Roman times have disappeared," and that means we may never be able to "prove" any more about this Jesus of Nazareth. The fact is that he is one of the most influencial men in history, whether we agree with him or not.
     
  19. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    340
    The dude said some very cool things and if we humans lived by those teachings,which we do not a lot of the time,we would live in a much better world.
    Whether you believe or not it would be hard to dispute this fact. I chose to believe,maybe not the way others do but in my own way.
     
  20. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your posting could be a very good thread in itself......... I am Catholic...Am I a good Catholic? I don't know. That was the conversation I had over morning coffee the past 2 hours with a friend. She is a extremly devoted individual towards the faith......

    I do not consider myself a very religious individual as most would define "religious." However, I am very devoted to the the charities that are spawned by the Catholic Church..... So I am somewhat defensive about people attacking Christianity...... Too many people define 'Christianity" as the Falwells of the world. So they attack all.
    jhusky is right. How can we go wrong with the teachings of this Jesus?? Even if Jesus was just a man????? Isn't this the world we all would want to live in ????
    I enjoy listening to younger college students who ramble on about the intelligent insight of the Far East religions, but toss the Bible out as being full of falsehoods.
    I am not a Bible thumper..... Most of my friends/family are either gangsters or priests........[ I figure that these are the only people you can really trust] But I question the motives of individuals who want to tear down christianity.
    Just a thought.......
    Continue on..........
     
Loading...
Loading...