Geologist: ''Jesus was married with a child and tomb found''

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Abednego

I'm not following this. I can see how it would explain the kids issue, but if we can't prove Jesus existed, how can you determine he was married?

I assume in the same way that it was proven that many of the ancient Egyptian Pharaohs existed and were married - by the discoveries of their tombs - or ossuaries, as it were, and in the plethora of writings by his disciples, followers and other contemporaries as outlined in the New Testament and other writings. Or do you not believe that the Bible contains any historical accuracy?

BTW - I'm not a bible-thumper or evangelical of any kind. If anything, I would label myself a failed or lapsed Catholic with a love of ancient history and writings.

pah - fake news

i has discovered teh tomb of brian

So now we're saying Jesus was a real live person. And had a family.

I thought he was made up and there was no historical references to prove he was ever a real living person.

Make up your minds.

originally posted by: jjkenobi

I thought he was made up and there was no historical references to prove he was ever a real living person.

The year of our calendar is based on the guy. His historicity is undeniable.

originally posted by: cooperton
The year of our calendar is based on the guy. His historicity is undeniable.

That wasn't done until the 6th century.

a reply to: cooperton


The story of Herod slaughtering all males under a certain age also comes from the book you feel is infallible. The biggest problem though is that Herod died between 4&6 BCE so he couldn’t have been slaughtering infants from the grave. And as Augustus points out, it was the Romans who established the calendar we use in the west. Not Jesus.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Denoont

Basically, the historical existence of Jesus is more of a given than Buddha and half of early medieval rulers AND many events in Europe

That may be the case but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Buddha said, "I am a teacher in search of the truth." .
Jesus said, "I am the truth" Proof that Jesus was God Incarnate rests on four anonymous gospels, does it not?

You must realize we all are God Incarnate. The difference with the 9D Jesus personality is He incarnated with ALL MEMORY of his creation/past and knew his mission. We on the other hand have a plan for ourselves to progress our souls that we immediately FORGET upon incarnation. Why? because we would not progress our souls if we knew the script/outcome. Jesus/Mohammed/Buddha knew their fate and destiny. They had a heads up. They were inserted to CHANGE the paradigm that existed in that area of the world in that time period. I like the proclamation "I am the teacher in search of" to "I am the Truth". Kind of nails it regarding insight, purpose.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

I totally agree with your interpretation vethumanbeing, but the majority of people, including many Christians, have taken Jesus words literally, which explains why Christianity is attacked moreso than other religions. Double entendre was commonlty used in OT as well but OT never inferred to any person as God incarnate.

I suspect that God incarnate was inferred purposely in NT to ween the greek/roman populace away from the many gods that they worshipped. So rather than present a pure white version of religion that no-body would follow. A greyer version was presented that was more palpable to the general populace mindset at that time. Obviously a whiter version of Christianity would have been made available to pupils that were worthy of recieving greater knowledge.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
That wasn't done until the 6th century.

Yeah because for the first couple hundred years they were trying to eradicate any trace of this man Jesus. Killing his followers. Yet the martyrs knew it was worth it to perpetuate the name of this man to give hope to everyone. Once Rome realized they couldn't destroy it, they joined it.

These events don't occur over something fictitious. People don't become martyrs for something they make up. Jesus's historicity is undeniable.

originally posted by: glend

I suspect that God incarnate was inferred purposely in NT to ween the greek/roman populace away from the many gods that they worshipped.

This is a very important distinction in my opinion. Jesus never called himself God. Even to the point of denying that he himself was good, and that only God was good (as in the archetypal idea of pure goodness). Instead of saying he was God, he said "Me and my Dad are 1". This is the marriage of the higher heavenly thought archetypes with the material vessel human body. Jesus called us all brothers and sisters, capable of the same embodiment of the heavenly archetypes.

a reply to: cooperton

What does any of that have to do with you being wrong about the calendar?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: cooperton

What does any of that have to do with you being wrong about the calendar?

"The year of our calendar is based off the guy"

What's wrong about that statement I made^?

originally posted by: cooperton
"The year of our calendar is based off the guy"

Because no one even knows what the actual year was. It's a guestimate working back from Consular years which were notoriously inaccurate.

It's based off an inaccurate estimation of the guy.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Because no one even knows what the actual year was.

How does that make me wrong that our calendar was based off him? AD literally means "in the year of the Lord" and is referencing Jesus. If it's some years off that doesn't detract from that fact. Jesus is absolutely 100% a historical figure and our calendar is based off the time he came.

Scientists deserve credit for inventing vaccines and water purification and refrigeration, doctors deserve credit for administering medicine, philanthropists and activists deserve credit for volunteering their resources in soup kitchens and relief packages and building shelters for the less privileged. Jesus deserves credit for being a screen door on a submarine when he could have been a dragon among sheep. But I suppose even dragons meet their end given enough knights and mages trying to make a name. Just look at the pharaohs. Nothing lasts forever...not kingdom, not god, not even this rock or the star it is orbiting. Hundreds of deities have failed the test of time and this one is no different.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
That wasn't done until the 6th century.

These events don't occur over something fictitious. People don't become martyrs for something they make up. Jesus's historicity is undeniable.

And without even realizing it, a fanatical type once again says something as an absolute with them in mind, but leaves the door wide open for the other religious martyrs of the world. Like the jihadi SOBs, the Buddhists that go Rambo on their rival religious & ethnic groups, etc.

Guess that muddies the water a little, doesn't it? If people don't become martyrs over something made up, where do the non-Christians of the planet stand, eh?

Never mind, I'll spoiler it -- It's demons/demonic influence, lies, or they're the exception that make it all up, OR all of the above, right?

originally posted by: cooperton
How does that make me wrong that our calendar was based off him?

Let me rephrase then, it's not as consequential for several reasons, one it's inaccurate, two, it was a very late adoption by Western Europeans and three it isn't universal.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Let me rephrase then, it's not as consequential for several reasons, one it's inaccurate, two, it was a very late adoption by Western Europeans and three it isn't universal.

It's the most universal calendar in the world. Even the Chinese use it as their civil calendar. Jesus was a historical fact. Why are you so vehemently opposed to that?

originally posted by: Nyiah


And without even realizing it, a fanatical type once again says something as an absolute with them in mind, but leaves the door wide open for the other religious martyrs of the world.

oh hey welcome to the conversation. Feel free to throw away your bias in the trashcan on your way in.

Like the jihadi SOBs

Muhammad was a real person. The Quran's "kill the unbeliever in times of persecution"... definitely sucks compared to "turn the other cheek" found in Christian philosophy. But nonetheless, Muhammed was a real person which these martyrs were dying for.

the Buddhists that go Rambo on their rival religious & ethnic groups, etc.

Buddha was also a real person. I'm sure he, like Christ, would have been super pissed to know that people were killing in his name.

Not sure why these examples are supposed to ruin the historicity of Jesus? Or even what your point is, besides that you clearly have a resentment towards a general group of people.

originally posted by: cooperton
Jesus was a historical fact. Why are you so vehemently opposed to that?

Who said I was?

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: vethumanbeing

glend: I totally agree with your interpretation vethumanbeing, but the majority of people, including many Christians, have taken Jesus words literally, which explains why Christianity is attacked moreso than other religions. Double entendre was commonlty used in OT as well but OT never inferred to any person as God incarnate.

Christians think Jesus was the ONE absolute God (in flesh). Well he was (but we all are) so stated before. For whatever reason those responsible for the pushing the NT narrative neglected to inform its students they are God particles; God expressing Itself through them. Perhaps those in charge knew this and hid this information.

glend: I suspect that God incarnate was inferred purposely in NT to ween the greek/roman populace away from the many gods that they worshipped. So rather than present a pure white version of religion that no-body would follow. A greyer version was presented that was more palpable to the general populace mindset at that time. Obviously a whiter version of Christianity would have been made available to pupils that were worthy of recieving greater knowledge.

That is a really good hypothesis. Wean the populace from multiple God worship instead of forcing it; a failed example would be Akhenaten trying to foist one God in Egypt. We could begin another discussion of why it is necessary to hide the truth of all of this. Oh I know; to become enlightened one must work for it (all in process of growing the soul)...information is valuable.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
pah - fake news

i has discovered teh tomb of brian

The 28 year ban on that tomb ended in 2008; so you are good to excavate.