Archaeologists, scholars dispute Jesus documentary

[itsbob]

Don't take part of it. Take it all. Again, you want to go with the apples instead of the oranges.

And I have fallen into your perpetual trap of pointless debate. You can have this "win", too, if your must. You go on your merry way. We will know who is right or wrong when we die. Good luck.

How can you say one people are dying because of the WRONG blind faith, when you yourself admit to taking the Bible and Christianity on blind faith?

 

[Inkpen]

Interesting that you capitalize the word Koran but do not the word Bible. A little Freudian revelation?

Word Koran, proper noun ..."The sacred text of Islam, considered by Muslims to contain the revelations of God to Muhammad. Also called Alcoran."
it is the name of a specific item

bible, just a noun. "A book considered authoritative in its field is called a bible."
"A book or collection of writings constituting the sacred text of a religion."
Not a specific item.
Unless you specify, "Christian Bible, Holy Bible", etc."

Sorry...but the usage is correct.

 

[itsbob]

Yep. As long as they take your fecal matter ridiculing their faith.

I debate, but when have I ever not been freindly to you or yours? You disagree with me more then anyone on these boards, but when I have met you I have shaken your hand, and treated you respectfully.

I may disagree with you, but I don't think you any less of a person for what you believe, nor do I think you are any less a good person. I know you have a good heart, and would welcome you into my home any time.

The forums are fun, but at the end of the day, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't like or respect you. (there are, however, a few exceptions to that rule!)

 

[2ndAmendment]

Read back, you'll see I capitalized the "Bible" as a title of a book, just as I did the "Koran" a title of another book. Something I learned in the 5th grade I believe.

Uh. Maybe you better read back.

And what about the plagiarism??


People unknowingly die for Hoaxes everyday.. look at the Muslim Suicide Bombers.. hmmm? What say you for that? If you're right they can't be right, so day after day, the innocent people befuddled by yet another historical hoax give their lives... They read the Koran just as you read the bible, they put their blind fatih in the fact that it is true.. they are willing to bet their lives on ie.. they willingly go to their deaths JUST as the followers of Jesus did. Which follower is giving their lives to a hoax?

The Koran is a written historical document too, which part is false? All of it? Just the parts that don't agree with the bible?

 

[Midnightrider]

Uh. Maybe you better read back.

I thought you already took your bible and went home so we couldn't play....

why are you back just to attack someones grammar?

 

[2ndAmendment]

I debate, but when have I ever not been freindly to you or yours? You disagree with me more then anyone on these boards, but when I have met you I have shaken your hand, and treated you respectfully.

I may disagree with you, but I don't think you any less of a person for what you believe, nor do I think you are any less a good person. I know you have a good heart, and would welcome you into my home any time.

The forums are fun, but at the end of the day, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't like or respect you. (there are, however, a few exceptions to that rule!)

And I have always been friendly to you and yours. I think you are less than respectful in your debate. Because of that, I try to limit my debate with you. Heck. I don't like to debate. It never changes anything, nothing at all, never. Each side of the debate continues to believe as they did. I have never witnessed a debate where one side said, "You know what, you are right. I am totally off base in my thinking." Does not happen. It certainly does not happen with something as precious as one's faith or lack thereof. Why you choose to engage in debate with Christians is beyond me.

 

[itsbob]

Hey - a horse's ass is a horse's ass.

If you recognize that, at least we know the mirror in your bathroom is clean!!

 

[2ndAmendment]

Word Koran, proper noun ..."The sacred text of Islam, considered by Muslims to contain the revelations of God to Muhammad. Also called Alcoran."
it is the name of a specific item

bible, just a noun. "A book considered authoritative in its field is called a bible."
"A book or collection of writings constituting the sacred text of a religion."
Not a specific item.
Unless you specify, "Christian Bible, Holy Bible", etc."

Sorry...but the usage is correct.

Usage in a sentence as in "the Bible" the word "the" implies the Holy Bible. If the usage was "a bible" as in "a good hunters' bible is" then it would be not specific.

 

[vraiblonde]

They had a blurb about this on Fox this morning. Said they knew it was Jesus because of DNA testing.

Now, I'm not a genius or anything, but um...don't they have to have something to match it to? Wouldn't they have to have a direct known descendent of Jesus to match DNA?

As far as I'm aware, there is no such person.

 

[Toxick]

If you recognize that, at least we know the mirror in your bathroom is clean!!

A whole hour and that's what you came up with?



Why didn't you just save yourself some time and say, "I know you are but what am I!"

 

[dustin]

Reading this I'm thinking, "So being that THE Jesus was a well known guy back in those times, wouldn't it be possible that someone named their kid Jesus after Him?"

It's like picking up an old faded scratched driver's license with just a smudged out picture of what looks to be a black guy on it... and only the first name is legible... and reads "Samuel".... and then thinking "Oh this must be Samuel L. Jackson's drivers license!"

 

[vraiblonde]

I don't find it surprising that Jesus might have been a married man and had children. And I also don't believe that negates the NT.

What I DO find hard to believe is that they found these bones in 1980 and just now, 26 years later, it's becoming newsworthy? Smells like a hoax to me. If the original finders had thought credibly that this could be Jesus, there's no way it wouldn't have become headline news.

 

[SamSpade]

I don't find it surprising that Jesus might have been a married man and had children. And I also don't believe that negates the NT.

What I DO find hard to believe is that they found these bones in 1980 and just now, 26 years later, it's becoming newsworthy? Smells like a hoax to me. If the original finders had thought credibly that this could be Jesus, there's no way it wouldn't have become headline news.

That's close to my take on it - timing, with regard to the popularity and ubiquity of the DaVinci Code. 26-27 years ago, you don't get much traction suggesting that Jesus survived the crucifixion, DID NOT RISE FROM THE DEAD, married, had children and the truth is a centuries old cover up. Now that the most popular novel of the past several years has suggested it and been made into a movie - the idea is out there to capitalize on.

You know, same with the timing on the Shroud of Turin, which has also been shown to be - well - not particularly miraculous.

Imagine the fun you'd have if you turned up Mohammed's private diary, where he discloses he did the whole thing to make money and get lots of women.

Ok, THAT probably wouldn't be good timing.

 

[Midnightrider]

I thought you already took your bible and went home so we couldn't play....

why are you back just to attack someones grammar?

I NEVER post my karma, but this is just some funny stuff:

Sure hope you make it to the side of light, as opposed to the dark side.

Luke, I am your father.............

 

[itsbob]

Thats easy to explain.

Any person’s blood, post-conception, is determined by their father’s blood, not their mother’s, which is why a blood test can determine paternity so much easier than maternity. Jesus is no exception, and that is part of what qualifies Him as the Redeemer of man’s sin. Since He has no earthly father, He does not share in the cursed blood passed down from Adam. That and His sinless life make Him the “spotless Lamb”, who’s blood covers all sins.

Why is Adams blood cursed?

 

[itsbob]

Because that evil temptress Eve ate the apple (can someone explain why Christian women are ok with the "belief" that they are the root of all man's sins?).
Its easier to verify paternity (first father - Adam) than maternity (first mother - Eve) so we could determine Adam's sinful blood easier than Eve's. Since Jesus was the Son of God, and therefor without Sin, his blood wouldnt have Adam's characteristics.

If eating the apple was part of God's plan (and it had to be) why would it be a sin?

 

[Toxick]

Well, gee whiz.


I can't wait to see where this conversation ends up.

 

[vraiblonde]

Its easier to verify paternity (first father - Adam) than maternity (first mother - Eve) so we could determine Adam's sinful blood easier than Eve's. Since Jesus was the Son of God, and therefor without Sin, his blood wouldnt have Adam's characteristics.

I am dying to know how they test blood for sin.

 

[vraiblonde]

Well if the legend is true... Jesus wouldnt have any Paternal DNA correct?

Right. But how are they going to get Mary's (or Adam's or Eve's) DNA to make a match?

WAIT!!! OMG!!! I just thought of it!!! We could get GOD'S DNA! Then it would prove that the bones in the casket belong to Jesus!

 

[SamSpade]

WAIT!!! OMG!!! I just thought of it!!! We could get GOD'S DNA! Then it would prove that the bones in the casket belong to Jesus!

Just get him to swab His cheek. How hard is that? Duh!