Oh Christ!!

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:48 am

For all the furor on other forums about the Jesus Tomb documentary, I am curious about why it was so ho-hum here. Very little was said, no support, no refutiation, a few terse comments and then a non-event.

Why?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:02 am

Perhaps most of us think it was a non-event Monk.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:09 am

Strange, Digit. There are some well respected, intellectual forums where this thing is still being discussed. Oh well. For me it was a non-event. Clearly.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:53 am

Some of the assumptions that were made in that program are simply bizarre.

I'll give you one that I discussed with Arch (civilly!) last night. He even agreed.

Ossuaries were not designed for display, or, if you prefer, they were not designed to be a monument as is a tombstone. As even Jacobovici noted, the purpose of inscribing the name was to allow family members to move the boxes around inside the tomb.

So in this tomb we end up with boxes inscribed "Matias" or "Jose" which presumably were enough to allow family members to know who they were. However....when it comes to a name that might generate a handsome payoff to a forger...all of a sudden we get Yeshua, son of Yosep; Yehuda, son of Yeshua; or, worst case....Yakov, son of Yosep, brother of Yeshua! How come Matias and Jose don't merit that kind of inscription?

I smell a rat.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:05 am

Good point. Typically family members do not use titles nor surnames in referring to their loved ones. Unless others would be looking at the boxes and if that was the case, the names would have been neatly carved.

What doesn't add up however; the boxes were discovered for the first time, supposedly, by the construction crew, and the inscriptions were recorded at that time by the field archaeologists.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:11 am

what I particularly like is the way that hes proclaimed to be the Son of God
of course the fact that there is no direct evidence that he himself ever claimed this is irrelevant
there is no Gospel according t o jesus, at least no Gospel that hasn't been channeled by someone froma different planet
should you take the claims of the group that he came from as evidence then hes just a prophet
so why Simcha is so excited that finding a dead old corpse box that would prove that Christ was just a man is a little mystifying
as a good well behaved hebrew with faith he should already believe that
seems he juts wants to prove it to all the christians out there that they're totally wrong and should all just be worshipping YHWH like he does
except according to Simcha
YHWH isn't all that great anyway as it was the explosion of Thera that got the Israelites out of Egypt
so just what does this guy believe
or is it possible and I admit this is a long shot
is it possible that hes just in it for the money

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:26 am

marduk wrote:what I particularly like is the way that hes proclaimed to be the Son of God
of course the fact that there is no direct evidence that he himself ever claimed this is irrelevant
there is no Gospel according t o jesus, at least no Gospel that hasn't been channeled by someone froma different planet
should you take the claims of the group that he came from as evidence then hes just a prophet
so why Simcha is so excited that finding a dead old corpse box that would prove that Christ was just a man is a little mystifying
as a good well behaved hebrew with faith he should already believe that
seems he juts wants to prove it to all the christians out there that they're totally wrong and should all just be worshipping YHWH like he does
except according to Simcha
YHWH isn't all that great anyway as it was the explosion of Thera that got the Israelites out of Egypt
so just what does this guy believe
or is it possible and I admit this is a long shot
is it possible that hes just in it for the money

Well, try as I might, I can't find anything to really disagree with.

p.s. except perhaps I don't agree with Simchas claims for YHWH but that has nothing to do with your statement.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:33 am

Forum Monk wrote:Good point. Typically family members do not use titles nor surnames in referring to their loved ones. Unless others would be looking at the boxes and if that was the case, the names would have been neatly carved.

What doesn't add up however; the boxes were discovered for the first time, supposedly, by the construction crew, and the inscriptions were recorded at that time by the field archaeologists.

Not true of the James ossuary which has a checkered past...to put it mildly.

It just seems like an oddity and while a real archaeologist, Amos Kloner, did the intial work on the tomb neither he nor anyone else gave it a second thought that these inscriptions could be significant.

There were a few other oddities in the boxes, as well. The idea that "Mariamne" would be called "Mara" (master) at this time period is questionable. In a thoroughly male-dominated society no male would call a woman "master."

For that matter, Mariamne was not that uncommon a name (two of Herod's wives bore that name nearly a century earlier.)

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:41 am

marduk wrote:there is no Gospel according t o jesus, at least no Gospel that hasn't been channeled by someone froma different planet
should you take the claims of the group that he came from as evidence then hes just a prophet

True. That has always been a problem. The complete lack of contemporary historical reference to Jesus has always been a problem for christian apologists. It actually even goes deeper than that.

so why Simcha is so excited that finding a dead old corpse box that would prove that Christ was just a man is a little mystifying

He's a showman who uses "history" as a product. Controversy sells. I read where the Discovery Channel had 4 million viewers for that show. It worked....and now there is a book coming out.

or is it possible and I admit this is a long shot
is it possible that hes just in it for the money

Bingo.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:48 am

Ok, so now I'm dying to ask.

Do you question the existence of this Jesus as a historical person, or do you question the claims that are made about him?

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:37 am

I tend to think that, at best, he was cobbled together from different sources. There were several small scale revolts against Roman authority or the successors of Herod throughout the region and a couple of the leaders were crucified. The "love-thy-neighbor-do-what-the-fuck-you're told" mantra was a later creation by the Romans.

At worst, most probably, he is merely the Jewish version of all the other saviour god mythology which was running rampant in the first centuries BC and AD.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:43 am

Do you question the existence of this Jesus as a historical person, or do you question the claims that are made about him?

both and neither
I have no problems accepting that he might have existed
but the claim that he is the son of the one and only god who is valid is a little out there
not only is it highly unlikely as this particular god named Jehova didn't exist until after Christ but its also insulting to every other organised religion that claims the same thing
you have to seperate Christians from Hebrews in any theological discussion
although they are based on the same origin they are not the same
and its not me insisting thats true either
its them
and really some of the claims for him are a bit silly
take feeding the 5000 for instance with loaves and fishes
how many of those 5000 actually had stated a preference for cod in breadcrumbs
if he really was the son of god he could have made Kentucky fried chicken bargain buckets or Big Macs rain from the sky

if he expects me to worship him it would have to have been Tacos

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:57 am

Demeter of Eleusis multiplied loaves and fishes in her role as Mistress of Earth and Sea.

http://www.skepticfiles.org/mys3/christ.htm

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:04 pm

Come on, Min. You can't go out and find some random essay and cite that as evidence. The author made plenty of claims and not a single citation. I wouldn't consider it a scholarly piece of work.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:08 pm

its roots lie in the divine right of Kings
it was said in many ancient mythological tales that if anything happened to the king then bad things would happen
Cattle would cease to multiply
wheat wouldn't grow in the fields
Fruit wouldn't ripen on trees
etc
so the story of Jesus making food multiply is just a way of saying
"LOOK HES A KING OK, HE CAN MULTIPLY FOOD"

I'd still rather have a Taco
by this standard fast food restaurants are kings
their food supply is also never ending

hey wait a minute
Burger King.......

its all starting to make sense

Behold the face of God