124 replies to this topic

[arunma]

By now you've all heard of it. The alleged tomb of Jesus, which will shake and topple the very foundations of Christianity by disproving the resurrection. Here's the link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.../site/newsweek/

Well there you have it folks, the atheist version of creation science (=not science)! Now discuss and debate.

[JRPomazon]

There are two reasons why this finding is bogus.

One: Jesus' body was taken away by his disciples to "fool" everyone that he had risen from the dead.

OR

Two: He rose from the dead, proving that he is God.

I'm inclined to believe the latter of these two.

Edited by JRPomazon, 27 February 2007 - 01:29 AM.

[Goose]

Its a Hoax, but I wonder what the fallout will be.

[Chikara Nadir]

Maybe his folks are there. Maybe his brothers. If the place is genuine. But we're never going to be completely sure, aye?

[Veteran]

Jesus is dead? When did that happen?

[Flint]

Jesus is dead? When did that happen?

He's hangin with McCartney and Elvis.

[GraniteJJ]

Yeah. I have to say, even if the resurrection was a hoax, would they really bury the body and mark the grave? Not very convincing.

"Here lies Jesus. But I thought he was resurrected."

"Shit, they're on to us. Why did we cleverly label the grave? It could have been the Tomb of the Unknown Jew, but no. We had to name names. Dammit!"

When will people learn that we're never going to find concrete evidence either way. Unless God jumps out of the sky and says "Religion is true" we will never know for certain. You've just got to have faith.

[SOAP]

Personally, I don't care if Jesus died and they found his bones. That doesn't debunk any of his teachings. Once upon a time, back in the earliest days when Christianity was a big old mess, the belief that Jesus was just a man who had some really good ideas taht really changed the world after he died was just a legimate as any other. There was also the belief that Jesus was purely a spiritual being and never set foot on earth at all. Everyone had they're own crazy theories about the nature of Jesus eventually the one that won out is what we got in Christianity today. Muslims believe we got it all wrong. I wouldn't know either way nor do I care. I care more about his ideas and how I can apply them to my own life rather who Jesus was as a person. He could be a woman for all I care. It wouldn't stop me from being Christian.

Actually what I find more interesting is the fact that according to this article he has a son named Judas.

[arunma]

You know the funniest thing about this pseudo-science? The tomb was found in 1980, and none of the archeologists who worked on it believe in the claims of the documentary filmmakers. These guys are even worse than the creation "scientists." At least a full 5% of real scientists don't believe in evolution! Not that creationism isn't stupid, but this documentary is more stupid. These guys have a big fat 0 in terms of scientific support.

Bleh. I have no tolerance for fake science. These people should be executed on charges of idiocy.

Personally, I don't care if Jesus died and they found his bones. That doesn't debunk any of his teachings. Once upon a time, back in the earliest days when Christianity was a big old mess, the belief that Jesus was just a man who had some really good ideas taht really changed the world after he died was just a legimate as any other.

An astute observation, but here's the catch. Christianity isn't offensive because it teaches that you shouldn't commit adultery or that you shouldn't steal. Heck, it isn't even offensive because it teaches that you shouldn't abort a fetus. Christianity is offensive because it teaches that if you aren't a Christian, you're headed for hell. People have no problems with Christianity's moral teachings, they have a problem with the fact that Christianity says to the non-Christian, "you should give up your religion and convert."

If Jesus did not really rise from death, then it means that you don't need to believe in him to be saved, i.e. you don't need to convert to Christianity. That is what people want to hear, and that's why they want to disbelieve in the resurrection.

[SOAP]

Believe in him or believe what became of him? Though yeah I can see how Christ never coming back from the dead kinda calls everything he said into question. I do believe he died on the cross but I don't know. His ressurection just seemed more like a spiritual thing than an actual physical event. Remind me why is it so important that his physical body ressurected and went into heaven?

[Travuko]

You know what I find offensive? That idea that because there is no phisical evidence proving the existance of God, therefore there is no God. I was watching a documentary on this idea that humans came about to be because of aliens landing on earth 6000 years ago, mated with, genetically enginered, or otherwise created the human race. Their main argument was the fact that there was a huge gap prior to and just after that time where there was, and this is historically and archielogically backed up, a rather significant incress in human development technologically and socially. Did anyone stop to think about the amazing coiencidence there. Hello? Now, I'm not in the slighest trying to argue this is evidnece there is a God, I just find it odd how people will put every effort into trying to disproving His existance. Can't some people just let it go? The way I define faith is a belief in something that is good and uplifting that cannot be proven. Just let people believe in what they want to believe. Science is about learning about the world around us. Not destroying a persons hope that there is something else besides this misierable existance. Can't we keep those to seperate? </end rant>

[31-Year-Old-From-Georgia]

*pops into the Contro forum* Uh oh.

Actually what I find more interesting is the fact that according to this article he has a son named Judas.

HAY GUYS I'M ACTUALLY A DISTANT DESCENDANT OF JESUS.

You know what I find offensive? That idea that because there is no phisical evidence proving the existance of God, therefore there is no God.

Hmm? Maybe people that hate on religious people and try to convince them that there is no God is annoying, but I don't see how the idea of there not being a God due to lack of evidence is offensive.

I was watching a documentary on this idea that humans came about to be because of aliens landing on earth 6000 years ago, mated with, genetically enginered, or otherwise created the human race. Their main argument was the fact that there was a huge gap prior to and just after that time where there was, and this is historically and archielogically backed up, a rather significant incress in human development technologically and socially.

That sounds totally ridiculous. o.o

*pops out*

Edited by 15-Year-Old, 27 February 2007 - 06:30 PM.

[arunma]

Believe in him or believe what became of him? Though yeah I can see how Christ never coming back from the dead kinda calls everything he said into question. I do believe he died on the cross but I don't know. His ressurection just seemed more like a spiritual thing than an actual physical event. Remind me why is it so important that his physical body ressurected and went into heaven?

Unfortunately one can't believe in this and the Bible at the same time:

And he said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, "Have you anything here to eat?" They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. (Luke 24:38-43)

Spirits don't eat fish.

Now, there's nothing wrong with using the word "spiritual" to describe the resurrection. In the fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians, Paul did describe the idea of resurrection in general as spiritual. But that word has changed its meaning in 2,000 years. Spiritual does not preclude physical. The idea that Jesus rose without a physical body just doesn't find support in the Bible.

[SOAP]

I see. I still don't understand why it was important for Jesus to be ressurected physically. He didn't really stay for very long and didn't his disciples get killed for claiming he came back from the dead?

Spaeking of spirits not eating fish I have something to ask you about but I'm gonna PM it to you later.

[Veteran]

I see. I still don't understand why it was important for Jesus to be ressurected physically.

Because otherwise he would've been just a man who could make a half-decent chest of drawers, and his shoddy craftsmanship pissed off a few Romans.

[SOAP]

Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and pretty much every religion out there for that matter all have founders that were "just" men but they're doing pretty good. Is Judaism any less valid because Abraham wasn't some immortal super human? Is the foundations of the Muslims faith starting crumble because Muhammad is long and buried? So what if turns out Jesus was just as mortal as Muhammad? Of course I don't have any reason to believe such as yet. But does it make our religion any less meaningful if he was? I think of Jesus as V from V from Vendetta. There's the man who the romans killed. Then there's the idea that he represented that lives on in the people that no one can kill. He was Yeshwah of Nazareth... and he was my father. And my mother... my brother... my friend. He was you... and me. He was all of us. As for right now, if the Bible says he raised from the dead that's all I have to go on. There's no point trying to second guess it when we we have little evidence of the contrary. All I'm saying is, if there was irrefutable evidence that his body remains on earth, that doens't really change much, for me personally, in believing in Christianity over any other religion.

[TheAvengerLever]

One: Jesus' body was taken away by his disciples to "fool" everyone that he had risen from the dead.

No offense to anyone for saying this, but...The disciples were too dumb to fool everyone. If you read the gospels, half the time the apostles had no idea what the guy was talking about when he was talking about the ressurection.

[Reflectionist]

No offense to anyone for saying this, but...The disciples were too dumb to fool everyone. If you read the gospels, half the time the apostles had no idea what the guy was talking about when he was talking about the ressurection.

Like Peter during the transfiguration? lol

EDIT - Well, they could've been being sarcastic.

"Jesus' body isn't there anymore!"

"No, really!?"

Edited by Reflectionist, 01 March 2007 - 02:17 PM.

[SOAP]

If the resurrection was a hoax I don't think the disciples had anything to do with it. Firstly they didn't even believe it when people told them Jesus was resurrected. Also when they starting claiming he had risen most of them were sentenced to death. What would be the point of staging someone's resurrection if it only gets you killed?

Either the resurrection happened or it didn't. It couldn't have been faked.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Frankly, I don't care what you believe. I don't care if you think Jesus was resurrected or not. I don't care if he was actually bludgeoned to death with comfy pillows. You are not going to prove anything with DNA tests, because you don't have a sample of DNA from the original Jesus to begin with. You don't even have anything close to it.

And what's with all these non-sequiturs flying around? Can't we go through one religious argument without someone mentioning evolution? Honestly, arunma, if you wanted to debate evolution, then start an evolution topic. Don't hide behind this piss poor piece of research.

As for the research itself, thank God it won't ever get published in a respectable journal. If the man off the street can see the logical flaws in it, then I'm sure the peer review process will weed it out faster than you can say, hoax.

Edited by Wolf_ODonnell, 02 March 2007 - 05:37 PM.

[GraniteJJ]

If the resurrection was a hoax I don't think the disciples had anything to do with it. Firstly they didn't even believe it when people told them Jesus was resurrected. Also when they starting claiming he had risen most of them were sentenced to death. What would be the point of staging someone's resurrection if it only gets you killed?

Either the resurrection happened or it didn't. It couldn't have been faked.

Well, technically, it could have easily been faked. The practice of keeping accurate records of everything was not around back then. And there aren't exactly any photographs, sketch books, or journal entries to support that the resurrection happened exactly as the Bible described. There are a multitude of things that could have happened. The resurrection could have happened as described in the Bible. And then it could not have happened in a multitude of different ways. The body could have been moved. He could have been cremated and scattered. He could have been beamed out by freakin' aliens for all we know.

Don't state anything as an absolute fact when it comes to religion. Because we never know.

[SOAP]

All I'm saying is, if it was faked, there'd be no reason to. Seeing as it could them killed for making the claim. I don't what they had to gain for it except becoming martyrs like Jesus. But I guess we can't say anything for sure. Since we don't have any physical proof we can only go by what people who were there had to say. It could be bunch of lies but at this point, I don't think it matters if Jesus died or rose back from the dead body and all. His ideas are still alive.

[GraniteJJ]

All I'm saying is, if it was faked, there'd be no reason to. Seeing as it could them killed for making the claim. I don't what they had to gain for it except becoming martyrs like Jesus. But I guess we can't say anything for sure. Since we don't have any physical proof we can only go by what people who were there had to say. It could be bunch of lies but at this point, I don't think it matters if Jesus died or rose back from the dead body and all. His ideas are still alive.

I don't know. Peter went on to be head of the Catholic Church. I think a position like that has got to have its perks. And that would have never happened if Christ hadn't "rose from the dead". Christianity has less weight to it without that event.

And his ideas are still alive, but once again you are failing to grasp what Christianity is. As an entity, the religion would suffer if the resurrection was proved to be false. It would be finding a whole in what is believed to be a divine truth, and would cast a shadow on all of Christianities teachings, leading them to be open to criticism and, possibly, dismissal.

[SOAP]

I suppose so. IF it can be proven false. At this time there's no way to prove it either way. Everyone has their theories but that's it.

And I don't know about Christianity having less wait. Muhammad is long dead but Islam's taking Europe by storm. If there was never any resurrection story to begin with and Jesus' story ends with the cross I don't know if Christianity would have taken off or not. It would certainly be different if it survived. I'd imagine it would just be a sect of Judaism or something.

[arunma]

And what's with all these non-sequiturs flying around? Can't we go through one religious argument without someone mentioning evolution? Honestly, arunma, if you wanted to debate evolution, then start an evolution topic. Don't hide behind this piss poor piece of research.

OK...that came out of left field. Am I missing something?

[SOAP]

Oh I think Wolf's just having his gay period or something.

[Steel Samurai]

I suppose so. IF it can be proven false. At this time there's no way to prove it either way. Everyone has their theories but that's it.

And I don't know about Christianity having less wait. Muhammad is long dead but Islam's taking Europe by storm. If there was never any resurrection story to begin with and Jesus' story ends with the cross I don't know if Christianity would have taken off or not. It would certainly be different if it survived. I'd imagine it would just be a sect of Judaism or something.

Muhammed never claimed to be God in human form.

[GraniteJJ]

Muhammed never claimed to be God in human form.

Exactly.

The resurrection puts Jesus on a whole new divine playing field, where he is really the only player. 100% human, 100% God. Without the resurrection, Jesus becomes...well, he does become what other religions acknowledge him to be. A rabbi, or a prophet. And before long, he is lumped in with everyone else. And Christianity becomes...less of a religion.

[Arturo]

But finding Jesus body doesn't mean he didn't resurrect. It just means that he died. But he could have died years after resurrecting, instead of ascending to the heavens. Or something.

Anyway, there are some good historical proofs that make me think Jesus' resurrection is a historical event

[Wolf O'Donnell]

OK...that came out of left field. Am I missing something?

As left field as the comments about Creationism and Evolution, surely? This Jesus' tomb crap isn't even comparable to that "debate".