It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Film to document discovery of Jesus' burial site

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I agree with your views on the social climate of the time, and language complexities - and I always did find the dead sea scrolls to be of interest.


Originally posted by donwhite
Assume, Mr W/W/N, that Jesus spoke Aramaic. He read Hebrew, but he spoke Aramaic.


Until now though, I might have argued that Jesus had never spoke or read anything as I considered him to be fictional. I wanted to believe that he actually did exist (not as a GOD, but as a person) and I always liked the fellow - the same way I liked fictional characters such as Shakespeare's Romeo Montague or Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom.

I find it somewhat refreshing to consider the entire story of Christianity as having originated around an actual person. For me, it's a fascinating twist.




posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I could only stay awake for the first half of the show. But one thing that interested me was the symbol above the tomb of a chevron and circle.

Did anyone else wonder what the symbol might have meant?

Anyway this morning I stumbled across the Vonage website and found they use the same chevron symbol and circle as the one above the tomb (upside down however). Not trying to tie in Jeasus with Vonage... just wondering what the symbols could mean.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Here’s my problem with the Jesus story. Even the Romans, as mean as they were, would not kill a subject just for being nice. Jesus was said to have suggested when He was sermonizing on the Mount, that we should love the weak, help the poor and visit the sick and those in prison. Jesus was reputed to have gone about the countryside healing the sick and letting the blind see and the lame walk. Yes, Jesus had his bad moments. Hey, we all do. He got mad when in the open courtyard around the High Holy Place, He found there was crass buying and selling going on. But hey, this is after all the Jewish homeland! What’s life if you can’t turn a few bucks? Or shekels.

And another thing. The Romans did not kill everyone who made them mad. For small offenses, they sentenced a man to 20 years at the oars. No use losing an able bodied man at least, not right away. Yes, it was true. Very few men survived that ordeal at sea, but then, life is often more luck than plan. What did you have to do to make the Romans mad enough to have you executed? Well, high treason was one sure way to get the death sentence.

Suppose the Apostle Simon of Canaan was a member of the resistance sect known as the Zealots? Terrorists. Three or four Zealots would surround a Jewish person who had collaborated with the enemy and when very close, one would stab him, then the Zealots walked away in different directions and the man would fall to the ground, dead or dying.

Aside: another Apostle was known as Judas Thomas Didymus, the last word being Greek for “twin” as in a twin brother. Suppose Jesus had a twin. This could account for the confusion whether Jesus had risen from the dead.

Resume: Jesus is said to have fed 5,000 men just outside Jerusalem. Suppose those men were part of an army Jesus had raised. In the old days, men did not have time or money to wander around in the desert unless they were on a mission. Suppose the plan called for Jesus to lead a small, commando strike force, special ops we call it today, and their mission was to capture the temple. That was the symbol of all Judaism. Once the temple was in their hands, Jesus could throw open the city’s gates and the 5,000 men could rush in, overpowering the smallish Roman garrison and the War is On!

Unfortunately for Jesus and his followers, the High Priest had his own counter-insurgency special ops. He had an informer inside Jesus’ inner circle. The Temple Police were forewarned and on high alert and proved more capable than Jesus had planned. Rebuffed by the police, the small band broke up and fled from the Temple to Gethsemane, their pre-arranged rendevous point. And as we know, the Romans were waiting for them.

Jesus was tried for high treason. The offense for which one would be crucified. The other two men executed with Jesus were co-conspirators, and for the same reason, the Romans hand them crucified. The Romans would not crucify ordinary thieves, nor waste good bodies fit for the oar.

Those three men were all guilty of treason. And they all paid the price. Because of the Jewish theory of the Messiah, and Jesus’ twin brother, the legend began that Jesus had risen from the dead and would return shortly with 10 legions of angels - real to those people - and free Judea from Rome! Well, that was their hope, anyway. A forlorn hope we know today.

Throw in a fanatic, probably a gay person and known to us as Saint Paul; add an ambitious Roman emperor, Constantine and 2,000 years of endless machinations, and you have Christianity, 21st century style.

Jesus? Hmm. Who’s he?

[edit on 3/5/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Well, after all of the hype and attempt to create controversy, I think the Lost Tomb of Jesus came off as weak, to put it very nicely. Here was a "science" documentary that ended up relying wholly upon probability and statistical analysis, neither of which provide 100% certainty of anything.

And, guess what? Without 100% certainty, we are not talking about scientific fact.

— Doc Velocity


I see that Cameron must've made millions from a Discovery Channel documentary.

By the way, it's Digital Domain but I just couldn't be arsed arguing with you.



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 08:39 AM
link   
I watched the documentary and found it somewhat interesting, but again nothing is 100% either way. For all here who seem to be jumping to conclusions 1 way or the other, I thin we are being a bit premature dont you?



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 02:36 AM
link   
Watching this documentary I found it to be quite interesting yet produce nothing that would truly make me believe they found something great.

I know nothing of this subject so to be it was quite convincing at times. Im sure to others who know about the subject it was nothing more than a snore.



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   
i watched it and found that, although science was somewhat present, this was primarily an endevour to make a film.

sure, it's bringing something to light, but more REAL science is going to need to step in to answer all the questions



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Didn't watch the show but this page, from a Christian perspective, is fairly objective and worth the read imho.

www.carm.org...


The ossuaries are inscribed in different languages: Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek.
Jesus, James, Judah are inscribed in Aramaic. Yose (Jose, Joseph), Maria, and Matthew are in Hebrew. "Marianmene e Mara" (Mary Magdelene) is the only one written in Greek. If the tomb is of Jesus' family, why are the inscriptions in different languages?

Does this suggest that different individuals, perhaps in different times, and of different backgrounds were buried in the tomb? Remember, families used the same tomb and ossuaries for generations. Therefore, we can expect to find the same tomb to have ossuaries with different inscriptions, in different languages, along with similar DNA since the same families would be using them. See point 5 below.




Statistical analysis of the names
How do they know which names were and were not common in those days? Isn't this a relevant question to ask when making statistical analysis? Joseph, Jesus, and Mary were very common names at the time. As Christianity grew, it would make sense that people would take the names of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, etc., as a sign of respect for and identification with their Christian beliefs.

Statistics can be manipulated. We're not suggesting that these statistics were, but there needs to be an explanation dealing with how common the names were in the culture at that time and the criteria needs to be examined.

Even if the statistical analysis shows the coincidence to be improbable, it still does not demonstrate that Jesus was in the ossuary. After all there are too many other questions and problems that counter that conclusion.



Counter evidence
Archaeologist says it isn't Jesus' tomb. "In 1996, when the BBC aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged the claims. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea [of the tomb being that of Jesus] fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television....It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave...The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time...The cave, it [Kloner's report] said, was probably in use by three or four generations of Jews from the beginning of the Common Era. It was disturbed in antiquity, and vandalized. The names on the boxes were common in the first century (25 percent of women in Jerusalem, for example, were called Miriam or a derivative)."7


Incorrect reading of names? "Pfann [a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem] is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name 'Hanun.'"8



Alternate burial site locations. "James Tabor, a Biblical scholar at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and the leading academic voice who lends enthusiastic, if qualified, support to Jacobovici's claims, wrote that he looked for, and found, a legendary tomb of Jesus near the city of Safed."9


Interesting to see where all this hullabaloo leads in the end... guess I'll have to watch the show after all. Just as "they" wanted. Blimey!

~Although the show doesn't seem to be getting much love from anybody here, regardless of which 'side' of the debate they're on. Which is interesting.

Your brother from another mother,
~Rren



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   


posted by Rren

Didn't watch the show but this page, from a Christian perspective, is fairly objective and worth the read IMHO.

www.carm.org...


The ossuaries are inscribed in different languages: Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek. Jesus, James, Judah are inscribed in Aramaic. Yose (Jose, Joseph), Maria, and Matthew are in Hebrew. "Marianmene e Mara" (Mary Magdalene) is the only one written in Greek. If the tomb is of Jesus' family, why are the inscriptions in different languages?

Counter evidence. Archaeologist says it isn't Jesus' tomb. In 1996, when the BBC aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged the claims. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said “the idea [of the tomb being that of Jesus] fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television . . It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave . . The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time . . The cave, it [Kloner's report] said, was probably in use by three or four generations of Jews from the beginning of the Common Era. It was disturbed in antiquity, and vandalized . . "

Alternate burial site locations. James Tabor, a Biblical scholar at the UNC Charlotte and the leading academic voice who lends enthusiastic, if qualified, support to Jacobovici's claims, wrote that he looked for, and found, a legendary tomb of Jesus near the city of Safed." END. [Edited by Don W]


The show doesn't seem to be getting much love from anybody here, regardless of which 'side' of the debate they're on. Which is interesting. Your brother from another mother~Rren



Our Christianity was formulated over the first four or five centuries of the Common Era. In fact it continues to evolve today. As every living organism does. Darwinism at work for God. In those early centuries there was so much selecting in, discarding out, altering, adding and deleting to the available texts - or plainly creating specious texts as needed - that it would take a supreme effort to ever learn who Jesus was and what was his game. If this confabulation had happened to our government, Bush43 would call for a bi-partisan commission to ferret it all out and to tell us what it means. But, alas, the First Amendment will prevent that.

The central tenet of the Christian religion is that Jesus arose from the dead. Should we find his bones, that single fact would break the faith down the middle and require a more dramatic re-defining of beliefs and rituals than human-kind has ever encountered. I dare say it would be impossible. A somewhat similar event occurred in ancient Egypt, when a pharaoh tried to replace the polytheism with monotheism. He failed. I believe he was the father of young Tutankhamen whose molested but intact burial site (KV62) was found in 1922 by Britain’s Howard Carter.

Statistically speaking, the odds this is the same Jesus mentioned in the Holy Bible are astronomically against it, even if Jesus was not raised from the dead. Probably no better odds than winning half of a $390 million lottery?

[edit on 3/8/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Watched it and man was it ever lame. Shoddy scholarship to say the least. Weak minor points hyped up and presented as solid evidence. This was obviously an attempt to make money and not a real investigation.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kokoro
Watched it and man was it ever lame. Shoddy scholarship to say the least. Weak minor points hyped up and presented as solid evidence. This was obviously an attempt to make money and not a real investigation.


...it's a documentary on the discovery channel, what more did you expect?

hopefully, it will open up the gates to truely scientific investigation of the site




top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join