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

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Still not addressing the discrepancy with the bible. Are you just pretending like if you don't acknowledge it, that it's just going to disappear? The Shroud does not align with the biblical account of how Jesus was wrapped in the tomb. Not to mention, the shape on the Shroud is wrong. It's not a 3d projection. It's just a 2d image.

But hey all of this is irrelevant; there are already multiple threads on this subject. All with the SAME evidence saying this Shroud is a forgery. The only people who still believe that the Shroud is real are science denialists.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm not questioning if pilate exists. I'm questioning your claims in relation to Jesus existing.

Your question was --
"Do you have proof of all this? And by proof, I want actual primary sources that state that Pilate was recalled for not issuing a Roman court order for Jesus' death."

My answer was
"Philo mentions Pilate and also the historian Tacitus as well as Josephus mentions Pilate. Eusebius relates in Historia Ecclesiae ii:7 that Pilate was recalled, exiled to Gaul and committed suicide in Vienne. I had made a study of that some years ago but would have to do a search on my work. I believe this is enough to give you a search if you have a mind to do so. But if you need manuscripts as evidence you will not ever get them as of today."

Most all that should be sufficient should be in the KJV bible.
Pilate found Jesus not guilty. Yet Pilate with his command and authority put an innocent man to death without a trial. This was a deliberate act against the Roman court. All deaths by trial must be approved by Roman law. In 37 CE the Roman Emperor Tiberus recalled Pilate for sedition against Rome. That charge was for various crimes of which Jesus was the last straw.

Pilate set out to Rome but the Ceasar Tiberus died before he reached Rome. Gaius Caligula was Emperor as Pilate reached Rome. Pilate was bound as a prisoner for crimes of sedition against Rome, was tried and convicted.

Now if you want to believe that Pilate was a nice guy and died with his boots on then that is you prerogative and if you want to believe that Pilate was not recalled for the death of Jesus then that also is your prerogative. I had contemplated a search for your question but -------------------

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm not questioning if pilate exists. I'm questioning your claims in relation to Jesus existing.

Your question was --
"Do you have proof of all this? And by proof, I want actual primary sources that state that Pilate was recalled for not issuing a Roman court order for Jesus' death."

My answer was
"Philo mentions Pilate and also the historian Tacitus as well as Josephus mentions Pilate. Eusebius relates in Historia Ecclesiae ii:7 that Pilate was recalled, exiled to Gaul and committed suicide in Vienne. I had made a study of that some years ago but would have to do a search on my work. I believe this is enough to give you a search if you have a mind to do so. But if you need manuscripts as evidence you will not ever get them as of today."

Most all that should be sufficient should be in the KJV bible.
Pilate found Jesus not guilty. Yet Pilate with his command and authority put an innocent man to death without a trial. This was a deliberate act against the Roman court. All deaths by trial must be approved by Roman law. In 37 CE the Roman Emperor Tiberus recalled Pilate for sedition against Rome. That charge was for various crimes of which Jesus was the last straw.

Pilate set out to Rome but the Ceasar Tiberus died before he reached Rome. Gaius Caligula was Emperor as Pilate reached Rome. Pilate was bound as a prisoner for crimes of sedition against Rome, was tried and convicted.

Now if you want to believe that Pilate was a nice guy and died with his boots on then that is you prerogative and if you want to believe that Pilate was not recalled for the death of Jesus then that also is your prerogative. I had contemplated a search for your question but -------------------

That is just inductive logic. It isn't proof that it happened. The proof I am talking about is a physical piece of paper that admits that Pilate was recalled specifically for sentencing Jesus to death without going through the proper channels. Otherwise it is just a big guess.

If you are trying to prove Jesus' existence, you can't use Pilate's dismissal as evidence. There is a break in the chain of evidence. All you have is two different accounts, neither of which mention the other.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I am sorry, who is making claims with no evidence whatsoever?...

Really? Are you really asking this??

Religion in general. Especially the Abrahamic ones.

a reply to: Agartha

"Could be explained" doesn't mean it is explained. More so when this is just addressing small sections of the entire shroud.

Not to mention. The punishment Jesus received was unique because Pilate at first did not want to kill him, which is why he extended the suffering of Jesus in the hopes that the Jewish people present at the time would be satisfied without having Jesus put to death. It was still deplorable. However, could you show us evidence of anyone else at the time of Jesus receiving the same wounds/suffering as Jesus did?

Then again, if the appearance of a full body of a dead person in the burial shroud that covered them could be explained with "aromatic and burial ointments" then we would have a lot of shrouds similar to the Shroud of Turin. So show me these other full body shrouds.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I meant your claim, and I quote.

It would be miracle enough that he survived the crucifixion, and the possibility that the body was wrapped in herbal ointments and linens as healing agents, and then spirited away by Joseph of Arimathea (a rich man) and his friends...

What proof do you have that this is what happened?

We could be making assumptions all day long about a lot of things, but assumptions doesn't equal as facts. If you are trying to counter faith with facts, then show facts and not made up claims.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If you are trying to prove Jesus' existence, you can't use Pilate's dismissal as evidence. There is a break in the chain of evidence. All you have is two different accounts, neither of which mention the other.

Inductive logic? Most certainly it is inductive logic. It could be no other way. All of history is inductive logic in some respects. Do we have a paper signed by Tiberus promoting Pilate to his position in Judah? Of course we have no such paper or certificate, In fact the Italian nation can not produce such a paper. Do we have a certified paper of Pilate being recalled from his position in Judah? Of course we do not nor does the Italian archives have such a paper.

The original subject was Pilate and not the existence of Jesus. Proving Pilate was even born is impossible except by inductive logic. Proving his death is also inductive logic. How much of existence is not inductive logic? Jesus is ingrained in much of history by inductive logic or reasoning. In this realm of theology what else is permissible except inductive logic? Are you saying that Pontius Pilate is the same theology as Jesus by association?

a reply to: Seede

No the original subject was Jesus. This entire conversation started when you questioned my assertion that there is no proof of Jesus' existence. You brought up Pilate saying that Jesus' death resulted in him being dismissed as an example of valid evidence of Jesus' existence. I told you to produce the documents that show that is the case. Therefore we would have proof of Jesus' existence in a record outside the Bible.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

i don't even know what the heck you are talking about. How about you tell us what discrepancy you are talking about? Start there instead of claiming that i am pretending to ignore it?... don't link me to a long list of claims you make in another thread, post your comment/claim in specific relating to the discrepancy you are talking about directly here.

As for your claim of "science denialism"... How convinient that you IGNORE the research and tests MADE BY SCIENTISTS that refute your claims... Science denialism... really?...

What about ignoring the newest results from 15 years of tests and 3 different types of tests?

...
The research includes three new tests, two chemical ones and one mechanical one. The first two were carried out with an FT-IR system, one using infra-red light and the other using Raman spectroscopy. The third was a multi-parametric mechanical test based on five different mechanical parameters linked to the voltage of the wire. The machine used to examine the Shroud's fibres and test traction, allowed researchers to examine tiny fibres alongside about twenty samples of cloth dated between 3000 BC and 2000 AD.
...

www.datingtheshroud.com...

Here is a video of what Nuclear physicist Tom D'Muhala, one of the 26 scientists who performed the tests in the late 1970s and early 1980s has to say about the shroud, and what Particle Physicist Isabel Piczek has to say about it.



Here is the conclusion from the STURP team, 26 scientists, who did the tests and published the results in 1981.

"We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."

en.wikipedia.org...

How convenient for you to ignore these...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What proof do you have that this is what happened?

Like I posted on page 3:

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: rickymouse

Here's a starter volume that I've read....but there are tons more.
The Fifth Gospel: New Evidence from the Tibetan, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and Urdu Sources About the Historical Life of Jesus Christ After the Crucifixion

There are loads more. Do some research.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I have read the lost Years of Jesus, and could not find any corroborating evidence just claims.

There are books which are written with many claims, but it doesn't mean it's the truth. If you could point out specific part of texts and their source then we could go on from there.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There are books which are made with many claims, but it doesn't mean it's the truth.

Yep, indeed there are. The Bible being #1.

If you could point out specific part of texts and their source then we could go on from there.

I gave you a source. You are free to look at the book, contents, excerpts, etc. on the link.

The Fifth Gospel presents some compelling new evidence about the life of Jesus which has been derived from a variety of sources in the East which are unknown to most Western scholars. By chance, one of the authors found, in 1965, a reference in Ladakh to the discovery of Buddhist scrolls about Jesus. Since then, the authors have been examining evidence about the survival of Jesus Christ at the time of the crucifixion, and his subsequent travels to the East. The authors' main purpose in writing this book is to inform the West that "we in the East have some source material about the historical Jesus who lived on after the crucifixion.... This book was not written in one day, but is a result of many years' continued search for evidence," and provides research on some very compelling questions.

(From the link provided above and on page 3.)

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Scientists? Lol! That's rich. Like I said, the carbon 14 dating test was all that was needed. It's a forgery. Those "scientists" are just Creationsts pretending to science. For instance, what does a particle physicist know about dating an ancient artifact? That is an appeal to authority fallacy there.

The shroud and the biblical text

Christians differ in the way in which they interpret the Bible. Fundamentalist and most other Evangelical Christians believe that God inspired the authors of the Bible so that they wrote text that was inerrant: free of error. Taking this approach, it is apparent that the details of the linen clothes described in Gospels appear to conflict with the Shroud of Turin:

Mark 15:46 states that Jesus was wrapped in linen. "The Greek verb used means 'press in,' "pack,' 'force in.' Matthew and Luke obviously found the word somewhat unseemly and replaced it with one that means 'envelop.' But the clear implication of all three synoptics is that the material was bound tightly round the body." 1 The Shroud of Turin shows an image made by simply lying a linen shroud on top of the front of the body, over the head and down the back.

Matthew 27:59: is ambiguous. It describes Joseph wrapping the body "in a clean linen cloth." The "cloth" could have been broad linen fabric in the shape of the Shroud of Turin, or could have been in the form of narrow linen bandage(s).

Luke 24:12 says that Peter observed the "...linen clothes laid by themselves..." If Jesus had not been wrapped in linen strips, but had been enclosed by the Shroud of Turin, one would expect Luke to have written that Peter saw the "...linen cloth laid by itself..." And the NIV translation would not have mentioned "strips of linen."

John 19:40 indicates that Jesus burial was a normal one, following the Jewish traditions. Thus, Joseph of Arimethea would have washed the body. The body shown in the Shroud of Turin was not washed.

John 20:6 repeats the events recorded by Luke; he mentions that Peter saw "the linen clothes," not the linen cloth.

John 20:7 makes a point of mentioning that there was a head covering -- a napkin -- as well as the (plural) "linen clothes." This passage describes multiple clothes. It does not match the shroud of Turin which is a single panel of linen.

I didn't ignore those results from STRUP by the way. I just don't care about them. The imagine really COULD be the image of a person, but it wasn't Jesus because the Shroud was made during the Middle Ages. So that information is rather irrelevant outside of trying to figure out how the Shroud was made.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Yep, indeed there are. The Bible being #1.

Actually a lot of what is said in the bible can be traced back through history. Were there changes made in the bible that should have never been done, sure, but still there are many other texts which were not included in the bible and also teach us about Jesus life. If everything in the bible was made up how come those other books exist?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
I gave you a source. You are free to look at the book, contents, excerpts, etc. on the link.

No, you gave a link to a book. It takes hours to read a book and I am not about to do that when I am not sure if what you say is true. If you are making a claim you should post direct evidence of that claim and not just claim that i have to read the book to find the evidence.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It takes hours to read a book and I am not about to do that when I am not sure if what you say is true.

Well, that's up to you, but in my experience, the refusal to look at opposing sources is a major reason that Christians know as little as they do.

You expect others to read the Bible, though, right? And then to just accept that it is "true"?

Here, try this link:
The Tomb of Jesus Christ Website

This website presents evidence that Jesus Christ survived his crucifixion and travelled to Kashmir, India.
It presents evidence that he lived the rest of his life in Kashmir, and his tomb is located in the Kan Yar section of Srinagar, the capital of Kashmir, India.

Easier for ya then? The evidence is out there. Up to you to read it and make up your own mind.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Yep, indeed there are. The Bible being #1.

Actually a lot of what is said in the bible can be traced back through history. Were there changes made in the bible that should have never been done, sure, but still there are many other texts which were not included in the bible and also teach us about Jesus life. If everything in the bible was made up how come those other books exist?

Have you ever heard of fanfiction before? Do you think it is something new with the modern era?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No the original subject was Jesus. This entire conversation started when you questioned my assertion that there is no proof of Jesus' existence. You brought up Pilate saying that Jesus' death resulted in him being dismissed as an example of valid evidence of Jesus' existence. I told you to produce the documents that show that is the case. Therefore we would have proof of Jesus' existence in a record outside the Bible.

My entire conversation on this thread started on page 4 and was a opinion of on the OP's opening post.
Within that post I did remark about the Talmud being censored.

Agarth then replied to me concerning the Talmud. The conversation was not centered on proof of the existence of Jesus. It was centered on the Talmud being censored.

Page 5 I replied to Agartha correcting misinformation concerning the Talmud.

It was here on page 5 that I replied to damwel and inserted the remark of Pilate being recalled

Again on page 5 Agartha replied in anger that I need no further conversation

It was on page 6 that you posted me with the challenge of producing proof of Pilate’s recall from Rome. Our conversation was not centered on proof of Jesus’ existence it was centered on proof of the recall of Pilate because of Jesus. It may have been your intention to bait me into that theology but existence of Jesus was not the central theme.

From that point on it was a discussion of Pontius Pilate and proof of his being recalled by Rome for the murder of an innocent man named Jesus. The point of this conversation may be different in your intent but certainly not in my intent.

Even if I could produce the court order from Rome concerning Pilate and this man named Yahusha (Jesus), it would not necessarily prove that Yahusha was the Son of God. It would probably give more evidence but I would still be left with Theology. This also applies to the tomb with the ossuaries which is the topic of this thread. Regardless of whether this is authentic or not authentic is not proof nor disproof of the deity.

In that light it is the same as with the Talmud being censored from the people. The Munich Talmud is absolute proof of Jesus being censored from its originality. Why the Talmud of today is censored will not determine the deity of Yahusha but it will raise more questions as to why it was censored. It is common sense to realize that when you have censorship it is only to hide something.

I gave you some vague sources simply because the conversation was not intended, by me, to delve into a debate about Pilate and it still is not my intent to debate Pilate. My opening post gave the OP my source for my opinion. This story is simply just that. It is a book selling piece from thirty years ago and nothing more.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Scientists? Lol! That's rich. Like I said, the carbon 14 dating test was all that was needed. It's a forgery. Those "scientists" are just Creationsts pretending to science. For instance, what does a particle physicist know about dating an ancient artifact? That is an appeal to authority fallacy there.

Yes scientists... The 26 scientists belonged to a wide range of different beliefs, including Agnostics, Babtists, Catholics, Jewish, Methodists, etc.

www.shroudnm.com...

For example, Barrie Schwortz was raised an orthodox Jew, although he stopped practicing Judaism when he was 13 years old.

There were many skeptics in that group of 26 scientists.

...
•
1978 Shroud Testing in Turin, Italy: 26 US scientists (STURP20) with 6,000 lbs of equipment to answer how the image was made
•
Most of 26 thought they would discover a logical explanation in five minutes (brush strokes, etc.) & enjoy an Italian vacation
•
They made special equipment, did a variety of tests & created protocols for 48, 72 & 96 hours, preparing extremely thoroughly
•
STURP ran all their protocols over five days and nights –120 hours straight –yet could not explain the image formation
•
STURPs main objective was to explain how the image got there
•
Ironically, science can tell us more about what it is not
•
No one, those who accept its authenticity and those who do not,
understand the process that made the image
•
The images taken by Documenting Photographer Barrie Schwortz of STURP in 1978 make up many of the online Shroud images.
...

www.shroudnm.com...

BTW, the tests done in the late 1970s and early 1980 were done to find HOW the linen could have been made... It wasn't made to find the age of the linen, but how it could have been made... Just to show that you wouldn't even bother to read anything contradicting your view.

Christians differ in the way in which they interpret the Bible. Fundamentalist and most other Evangelical Christians believe that God inspired the authors of the Bible so that they wrote text that was inerrant: free of error. Taking this approach, it is apparent that the details of the linen clothes described in Gospels appear to conflict with the Shroud of Turin:

Mark 15:46 states that Jesus was wrapped in linen. "The Greek verb used means 'press in,' "pack,' 'force in.' Matthew and Luke obviously found the word somewhat unseemly and replaced it with one that means 'envelop.' But the clear implication of all three synoptics is that the material was bound tightly round the body." 1 The Shroud of Turin shows an image made by simply lying a linen shroud on top of the front of the body, over the head and down the back.

Matthew 27:59: is ambiguous. It describes Joseph wrapping the body "in a clean linen cloth." The "cloth" could have been broad linen fabric in the shape of the Shroud of Turin, or could have been in the form of narrow linen bandage(s).
...

First of all, the above doesn't disprove anything...

...
Luke 24:12 says that Peter observed the "...linen clothes laid by themselves..." If Jesus had not been wrapped in linen strips, but had been enclosed by the Shroud of Turin, one would expect Luke to have written that Peter saw the "...linen cloth laid by itself..." And the NIV translation would not have mentioned "strips of linen."
...

Except that it wasn't just one piece. Jewish burial shrouds, ancient and even today, consisted of more than one piece. Hence the mention of linen clothes.

Here is a picture of one of the ways a dead person can be wrapped in a linen shroud.




The Sudarium, the piece used to wash Jesus face and cover it, is kept in The cathedral of Oviedo, Spain.
www.shroud.com...

The strips that were used to bind the Shroud and the Sudarium are probably lost to time, or could have been lost during the fire in medieval times that burned the shroud. The absence of the strips does not make the shroud and Sudarium as fakes.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
John 19:40 indicates that Jesus burial was a normal one, following the Jewish traditions. Thus, Joseph of Arimethea would have washed the body. The body shown in the Shroud of Turin was not washed.

The deceased Jewish people were not drained of blood. Jesus body was washed but he had raw wounds that would continue to stain the shroud. Again, not proof of it being fake...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
John 20:6 repeats the events recorded by Luke; he mentions that Peter saw "the linen clothes," not the linen cloth.

Yes, the Sudarium, the shroud and probably strips of linen used to bind both.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
John 20:7 makes a point of mentioning that there was a head covering -- a napkin -- as well as the (plural) "linen clothes." This passage describes multiple clothes. It does not match the shroud of Turin which is a single panel of linen.

Yep, the Sudarium that is kept at the Cathedral of Oviedo, Spain.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I didn't ignore those results from STRUP by the way. I just don't care about them. The imagine really COULD be the image of a person, but it wasn't Jesus because the Shroud was made during the Middle Ages. So that information is rather irrelevant outside of trying to figure out how the Shroud was made.

Nope, again the latest tests show it was made during the time of Jesus... As for you ignoring the research from the late 1970s and early 1980s... of course you would...

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

First of all i didn't say that you have to read the bible...

Second of all, how about this. Show me how in "Medieval times" they were able to put the image of a cruxified man, with the wounds of Jesus in a burial shroud WITHOUT PAINTING IT, and by just imposing the image in the first two micro-fibers of the burial shroud.

BTW, for those of you that do not know. The shroud has the scars of the nails in the wrist, the other wrist is covered by the other arm. In "Medieval times" it was believed that the nails were driven through his hands. So it couldn't have been made during Medieval times. You can see Medieval paintings showing how it was a common belief, even among the clergy, that the nails were driven in his hands and not the wrist. Yet that is not what the shroud shows.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What about it?
The Shroud has what looks like blood (but it's 'red' and not 'black' or 'brown') that indicates that the body wrapped in it was bleeding. DEAD BODIES do not bleed.

Because of that, it's more plausible that he was still alive, and treated with herbs and ointments and so on by his rich friend Joseph of Arimathea and their friend Nicodemus (Ha! Booya, y'all, I pulled those names out of my ready file - I didn't have to look them up - because I've studied this stuff.....really. Anyway, that's neither here nor there, sorry), in whose tomb (a brand new one) the body was put...he was healed by their care (they were Essenes, which were the best medicinal healers around at the time), and taken away. And/or left.

So - I'm not the one saying the Shroud is crap. But I am saying that it indicates a stiill-alive body that was still bleeding.

And all of that concession is not to mention the bit about gesso and repairs and red instead of black/brown, etc. The fact is that he might very well have been alive. Healed (by osmosis, or yogic trance, or a so-called "miracle," or medicine, either way) and recovered enough to get the hell out of there.

What would be so horrible if that were the truth, ElectricUniverse? What if it is proven someday to be the truth?

Many times Christians ask "how would you skeptics/unbelievers react if Jesus showed up?"

Most of us will be all, "well what do you know? o_O Will you look at that!" and other such utterances of shockingly unexpected discovery.

So - how's about you? If it were proven by opening that tomb in India, or finding a way to link the Shroud to ANY family now living via DNA, etc - or any other method, that Jesus was just a man, whose attempted execution failed, and by explicable means was saved from death, nursed, and put in a witness protection program....

what would YOU do?