posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 08:19 PM
Originally posted by WraothAscendant
Yep. Stories 100% bogus.
Archeologists found traces of many religions here-Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Especially considering Christianity is younger than 2500 years old, Judaism yes, Christianity no. And unless I am mistaken Islam is younger than
Ok just to play devil's advocate for a moment here... but isn't it possible that this story is real and maybe the reporter just screwed up on some
detail or another? Or maybe the item in contention is a cross of some sort. Isn’t it also possible that the cross, saying that both the story is
true and that it was a cross found at the site, was used in another religion prior to being adapted and indoctorated into the Christian religion? And
it’s only the archaeologist’s or reporter’s personal beliefs claiming it as an artefact of Christianity?
Personally speaking I am reserving judgement on this, mainly because a 396 word article isn’t nearly enough information to base a clear and fair
opinion on something like this. More so, when it is possible that human error is at fault and not fraud. … That being said I find it odd that the
reporter misspelled no less than five common place words, I am guessing that whoever wrote this doesn’t use spell-check.