|
Post by Prone on Mar 5, 2007 16:00:02 GMT -8
What were your insights on the program "The lost tomb of jesus" that aired on 9PM on the discovery channel this last sunday?
|
|
dxlightning
Platinum Membership
[ss:LostPeon's Gray][ss:LostPeon's Gray]
Posts: 1,246
|
Post by dxlightning on Mar 5, 2007 17:22:58 GMT -8
I don't see how they're going to prove that it's THE Jesus Christ, and that the child was his and not just some kid who was buried with him.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Mar 5, 2007 18:20:57 GMT -8
i think its garbage, prone, so should you, since you are the evangelist here
|
|
|
Post by raen7 on Mar 5, 2007 19:01:56 GMT -8
I'm sure he does, rabid; but like any good debate-tread-starter, he's reserving his opinions until a later point so as to provide the most open discussion possible. As for me, I'd like to shed a little more light on this, since Prone didn't provide us with any links or sources: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17328478/site/newsweek/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/26/AR2007022600442.htmlwww.thestar.com/Unassigned/article/185534I love this quote from the MSNBC link, just because it's fun to hear someone ripping into a Hollywood hot-shot and being intelligent about it: "Simcha [director of the documentary] has no credibility whatsoever," says Joe Zias, who was the curator for anthropology and archeology at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem from 1972 to 1997 and personally numbered the Talpiot ossuaries. "He's pimping off the Bible … He got this guy Cameron, who made 'Titanic' or something like that—what does this guy know about archeology? I am an archeologist, but if I were to write a book about brain surgery, you would say, 'Who is this guy?' ... Projects like these make a mockery of the archaeological profession." Really, only someone as egotistical and self-absorbed as James Cameron (and his cohort Sichma) would have the gall to assume that he knows what he's talking about in a field as demanding and deeply-studied as ancient/Biblical archeology. It's rather pathetic. These guys are nothing but a couple of Hollywood hacks, "riding the Dan Brown wave" (as the MSNBC report wrote), to make a quick buck. It's not that I care how producers make their money--they're mostly scum anyway--but my problem is that this kind of so-called "documentary" leads people away from the truth rather than towards it. To quote the archaeologist from the Washington Post article, "It's a publicity stunt, and it will make these guys very rich, and it will upset millions of innocent people because they don't know enough to separate fact from fiction." (emphasis added) This happens more than most people care to realize, with things like South Park, or the DaVinci Code, or that god-awful Left Behind video game. The extremist critics paint a very degrading picture of a particular religion (and they have every freedom to do so); but then the general population, instead of getting their facts straight, assumes that what they've just seen/heard/read must be true! And of course you have the other end, the people who are trying way too hard to get their message out and end up alienating the same people they wanted to reach. The point is, you have to do your damn homework. But people are too lazy. They want to believe what they see on TV because it's just that much easier. And what you end up with is an army of ignorant loud mouths who think that Jesus had a kid and Mary wasn't a virgin just because they read a paperback novel and took some cartoon show a bit too literally.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Mar 5, 2007 19:41:09 GMT -8
so you think its garbage too.... and i did do my homework, i even had a rather interesting discussion with my religion/history teacher at school on this subject
i just chose to be rather concise with my thoughts
|
|
|
Post by raen7 on Mar 5, 2007 19:44:44 GMT -8
I never accused you of not doing your homework, just people in general. In other news, I edit my posts way too much.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Mar 5, 2007 21:59:23 GMT -8
ah... oops i pulled the trigger a bit too soon eh? well in the case, lets just say, that this was actually the tomb of jesus, and his ossuary, it would definitely pose some new questions to be answered by the church. i doubt it would shake my faith even if it turned out to be true.... however as you said, i doubt the same can be said about a large majority of others who DO indeed follow and believe whatever they are told
|
|
|
Post by ♪Mr.Obv♫ on Mar 5, 2007 22:19:18 GMT -8
To me this is similar to "The Gospel of Judas". Its not a questiong of whether its true or not. Its a question of how does this affect my faith and what do I do now. As always there will be the critics and the ones who are hardcore believers but truthfully the coice is yours, Not MSNBC or the Washington Posts' choice. If you don't believe that this is Jesus then don't complain just don't believe. And this works the other way too. If you believe in it don't go trying to convince people. The director was just trying to show something that he believes in. To answer your question I think that it could be jesus. However, like dx said, it will be very difficult to prove that it is Jesus, and that the child buried with him was his. Still With me? Now to state my opinion on this I think that it is Jesus. I also think that this isn't "riding the Dan Brown wave" but that it is more of a spiritual quest to find Jesus to make people follow the 10 Commandments and pray more often. But raen I'm not totally against you. People do need to do their homework and see if They THEMSELVES believe in this or not. However, what if some way they did prove it, and the whole time you were against it. If they came on television and said that scientists had proven it what would you do? So I guess what I'm pointing at is that why doubt when there isn't any point in doubting? So what if it's Jesus? Hell, So what if It Isn't?
|
|
|
Post by raen7 on Mar 5, 2007 23:18:34 GMT -8
The director was just trying to show something that he believes in. Nothing personal but I have to call bullshit on this. It's speculation and sensationalism to maximize profit. Not that that's anything different than what Hollywood has done for decades; just don't try to turn it into something it's not. The same goes for Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ": it's not a spiritual re-awakening of your soul, it's a movie--designed, like any other movie or TV-special, to make more money than it cost to produce it. Now to state my opinion on this I think that it is Jesus. I also think that this isn't "riding the Dan Brown wave" but that it is more of a spiritual quest to find Jesus to make people follow the 10 Commandments and pray more often. Again, you're turning this into something it's not. But raen I'm not totally against you. People do need to do their homework and see if They THEMSELVES believe in this or not. You are missing the point. You cannot decide whether to "believe" a fact; it's just a fact. If you refuse to accept it, you're ignorant and stubborn. However, we are not talking about facts, we are talking about theories, propositions, and interpretations. And what you can decide, in all of this, is whether you're going to take the words of some Hollywood director and his amateur team of "intellectuals" over the work of thousands of historians, scholars, and archaeologists who have been digging and sifting through the ancient dust of Israel for centuries. However, what if some way they did prove it, and the whole time you were against it. If they came on television and said that scientists had proven it what would you do? So I guess what I'm pointing at is that why doubt when there isn't any point in doubting? So what if it's Jesus? Hell, So what if It Isn't? Why not doubt? If anyone deserves doubt, it is the washed up Hollywood director who thinks he may have uncovered the millenia-old bones of the most important figure in history. But in a way, I almost agree with you. Because I for one am not worried that anyone will "unlock" the "secrets" of Biblical prophecy and history, or conjure up some "evidence" that Jesus had a child who ever-so-coincidentally has the same name as the disciple who later betrayed him to the Roman guards. For my faith is founded upon the rock; and as the rock, it shall not be broken, crushed, weathered, torn, tossed, defaced, decomposed, or moved even an inch, by the efforts of men.
|
|
|
Post by Prone on Mar 8, 2007 18:16:49 GMT -8
Sorry I didn't come to this sooner, but I haven't really been on here for that long lately.
Well, for starters, the video was very interesting. Simcha was creditable in his findings on the ossuaries, and what he found was really interesting. There were 12 ossuaries, on which 10 had markings, maybe it was the family of jesus, maybe not.
However, he kept eluding, during the video, that there were probably similar names to those found on the ossuaries. The name Jesus was a very common name back then, and as such, may have been another Jesus, who was the son of Jose (Joseph), who's wife was Maria, or Mariamne.
They said the name Mariamne was found only ever once on any of the 1,000 ossuaries found to date.
If you take the literal meaning of the bible, Christ rose from the dead in the flesh, which meant that he did not leave his bones behind. So, if you go from that perspective, the bones from "Jesus'" ossuary are not his, and that it was another Jesus, who had the same names of his relatives.
To go back on what I said about there being another Family who had the same name, this would likely make more sense, going on the fact that since the DNA on both Jesus' and Maria's ossuary didn't match, they could have been married, which Jesus never did.
More insights from me later on.
|
|
|
Post by three2one on Aug 10, 2007 18:44:53 GMT -8
but then the general population, instead of getting their facts straight, assumes that what they've just seen/heard/read must be true! I know this is a little off topic but what is the difference between people believing what they see on t.v. or read in a novel and people who devote their entire lives to a book simply because someone told them that it is the word of God? Many religious scriptures contain stories or events that have no facts to verify them yet billions people world wide believe them to be truths. Most of or knowledge is given to us through books or orally, are you saying that we should not believe anything unless we experience it first hand?
|
|