Page 17 of 41
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:55 am
by Digit
Can't say Monk, but this infers there were some remains.
According to the filmmakers, the film’s claim is based on close work with world-famous scientists, archeologists, statisticians, DNA specialists and antiquities experts
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:03 am
by Beagle
Has anyone ever reported any bones or other material in these coffins?
According to the link above, genetic evidence has been acquired from the ossuaries that shows this is a related family. (It's 4 pages long)
One fellow quoted sems to feel about Simcha exactly like Min does.
(not sure which of the three threads I should be posting to)
Any one you want to I guess Monk. This has always been the thread dedicated to Simcha Jacobovici though.
That is a little messed up isn't it?
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:09 am
by Minimalist
Josephus, before he deserted to the Romans, campaigned extensively in Galilee and his History contains a virtual travelogue of the province in the late 60's AD. In spite of mentioning a great number of towns and villages there is no reference to 'Nazareth.'
The first actual mention of the site comes after the Bar Kochba revolt when a number of priests seem to have settled there after getting kicked out of Jerusalem....c 135 AD.
Even more to the point, in the authentic writings of Paul he mentions 'Jesus' hundreds of times but never 'Nazareth.'
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:16 am
by Beagle
I think they're going to release a movie short about it this week. Maybe we can all see it or you may be able to capture it on Pando.
I'm waiting to see the full story.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:16 am
by Digit
Is there anyway we can make this one thread?
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:19 am
by Minimalist
Beagle wrote:I think they're going to release a movie short about it this week. Maybe we can all see it or you may be able to capture it on Pando.
I'm waiting to see the full story.
I'm sure it will contain lots of shots of Simcha prancing in front of his own camera.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:24 am
by Beagle
You know of course that this is going to cause a war between Christians and secularists. You may be busy with Arch.
I'm gonna watch the show. (I need that popcorn icon)
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:25 am
by Forum Monk
You're right it (Nazareth) has a history as home for jewish priests who served the temple so it would have existed in some form prior to 70AD (this according to the catholic dictionary).
My feeling is, it was probably nothing more than a cluster of unimportant homes, which grew into a 'city' during the christian era, thanks to it being mentioned in the new testament gospels.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:31 am
by Digit
For what it's worth that's my view as well Monk. The word 'city' is often bandied about as meaning an area of large population, that isn't so, and even where it is so the city didn't normally start that way of course.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:45 am
by Minimalist
Sometime after 44 AD (when the Romans took direct control of Galilee) a Roman bath house was constructed in the area, probably as part of a military camp. The remains of the bathhouse have been found. Nonetheless, Jesus would have been dead for at least 7 years (Pilate's term of office ended in 37 BC).
Moreover, "Nazareth" would have been only about 5 miles from the well-attested city of Sepphoris and how likely is it that there would have been two cities that close together?
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:54 am
by Beagle
What about the ossuaries folks? Authentic, or coincidence, or fraud?
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:57 am
by Minimalist
Even the "James Ossuary" is considered authentic. It is the inscription that was added by Oded Golan. First century ossuaries are not uncommon.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:03 am
by Forum Monk
Yeah, they're probably authentic ossuaries. But for many reasons I have reservations about who they claim are in them.
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:26 am
by Minimalist
And the churchies fire back!
http://apnews.excite.com/article/200702 ... I2MO2.html
Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight.
"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."
"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 - 10 being completely possible - it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun." Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.
Kloner also said the filmmakers' assertions are false.
"It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave," Kloner said. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time."
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:38 am
by stan
Yet another hoax to separate folks from their money.
