It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Jerusalem Burial Cave Reveals:Names, Testimonies of First Christians

page: 4
12
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 06:36 PM
This was a good post! Good info and good subject matter.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 09:16 PM

Originally posted by reject
This is hard evidence set in stone that Jesus Christ walked the earth during the 1st century; irrefutable even.

Yeah it's hard evidence that Jesus existed...
Wait no... It's not... All it really is is evidence that people believed in Jesus. Want evidence that Jesus didn't exist? How about the fact that the story of Jesus directly mimicks that of Horus, an Egyptian god? How about the fact that the story of Jesus has several parallels to battles that the Romans had won over the Jews? It's essentially a parody religion, most likely created by the Romans to pacify the Jews after the war.

I'll never know for sure, and I don't claim to know. But this is the most likely scenario. The chances that the story of Jesus would have so many parallels is beyond mathematical chance.

Since the events occur in Josephus in exactly the same order as their counterpart events in the Gospels, probability theory can then be used to assess the likelihood that this might be due simply to chance, or instead, that one source copied the other. The calculation shows that it is over 99.9999% certain that one account was written based upon the other. This calculation takes a conservative approach that assumes that, once used, each of the eleven items could not be used again. The probability is thus calculated as 11 factorial, or 11x10x9x8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1 .This would equal 1 chance in 39,916,800. Expressed as a percentage, this means that it is 99.999997% certain that one account influenced the other. In other words, the likelihood that these parallel sequences occurred by chance is less than 0.000003%--effectively zero. (The alternative approach would assign truly random possibilities for each of the events, in which case the odds are calculated as eleven to the eleventh power, or one chance in 285,311,670,611, for an even more remote probability of 0.0000000003%.)

www.caesarsmessiah.com...

Would any Christian bother to look into this though? Not likely.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 09:51 PM

Well, Macr59.. all you have to do is ask him if he's real
But that in itself would be an act faith...which will result in an answer.

I understand you don't see the evidence, but faith doesn't need evidence to believe.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 10:12 PM
One thing that I have been thinking about that makes us different (unbelievers and believers) is that we have HOPE and some of you do not ..(what hope is there in believing that your just worm bait ..spirit and all) ....

I cant even imagine living without HOPE in this messed up world ..

NIce find OP

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 10:22 PM
[B] THE BIBLE'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE:

debate.org.uk...

Lots of good stuff at this link

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
The skeptics will find 200 + reasons to still claim Jesus Christ didn't exist.

What are you talking about? This is the kind of substantial evidence the skeptics want that shows that Jesus as a man may have existed. All christians have done is provide second-hand accounts of Jesus which are not credible or reliable. Finally, there is something we can debate on.

None of you doubt the existence of Alexander the Great even though nothing was written about him until 400 years after his death.

No one seems to care that his "proof" is from second hand sources.

Oh, I get it.. it's because he never claimed to be a God.

Oh, wait, he did claim to be a God.

Because of something called archeological evidence. Can you say the same about Jesus?

Maybe James's half-brother was a myth:

www.ucgstp.org...

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 11:57 PM

Originally posted by banyan

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

Originally posted by reject
It takes faith to believe what he taught as those who used this tomb did.

See? We cannot debate with this.

that's case closed for me. when the OP admits that in the end it just takes faith...the whole argument of physical conclusive evidence crumbles unconvincingly.

It takes more faith to believe in evolution in the present age. Yet billions of people do.

It takes great faith to present oneself as omniscient and omnipresent and state "God does NOT exist." also.

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 12:17 AM

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
This doesn't prove he existed, this just proves there was a sect of people who called themselves Christians - most probably Gnostic - and that one was buried here.

That doesn't make a myth about the sun real, it just meant there really were other people who believed it.

That is all.

I agree with you. It doesn't present any evidence as to the 'divinity' of Jesus either.

Originally posted by Sweet Paula
Wow. what banter! When will we see the light? I will retreat to my prayer chamber for all the unbelievers here. Don't laugh, it works.!!!

Why is it so hard to believe simple truths? Is it because we have an enemy of our soul? Think about it! Why would satan fight so hard for you....because he wants YOU! and probably has you.

Resist and fight the good fight of faith. You are loved and have been redeemed. Special one!

Each and every one.

[edit on 9/13/2008 by Sweet Paula]

Please, count me out of this madenss, I am asking you. I do not wish to have any part of it!

[edit on 14/9/08 by ChChKiwi]

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 12:23 AM
ooops

[edit on 14/9/08 by ChChKiwi]

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 12:48 AM

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Maybe James's half-brother was a myth:

www.ucgstp.org...

I am not an expert on this. I did a quick study of this. Apparently the Israel Antiquities Authority consider it a modern forgery. Some scholars do consider it authentic.

Let's go through points why it's very likely that it's a forgery.

1. The cleaning of the inscription.
Why would anyone do that?

Furthermore, the collector of the artifact does not get the benefit of the doubt for the modern cleaning. As a collector, he should have known that cleaning the inscription is a spoilation of the only evidence that could have established the antiquity of the inscription, and the most reasonable inference of this, given the object's provenance, is that the inscription is modern. The modern cleaning is like finding an unknown Da Vinci, taking a photograph of it, digitally retouching it, destroying the painting, and trying to pass off the admittedly touched up photograph as the only surviving evidence of the Da Vinci. It just does not pass the smell test.

André Lemaire on the James Ossuary

2. Patina on SOME letters.
It would be interesting to find out WHICH letters still had patina in them before the cleaning.

Unfortunately, the cleaning of the inscription--an act either of stupidity or shrewdness--is problematic. It might have removed traces of modern tooling. And when we are told that the patina is found "within some of the letters," we should certainly want to know which ones, since scholars have debated whether the phrase "brother of Jesus" might be a spurious addition

Bone (Box) of Contention: The James Ossuary

3. Questionable provenance.
It would be nice to know where it was found.

To begin with, there is the matter of its provenance, which concerns the origin or derivation of an artifact. Experts in the fields of objets d'art and other rarities use the term to refer to a work's being traceable to a particular source. For example, records may show that an artifact came from a certain archaeological dig, was subsequently owned by a museum, and then, when the museum sold off some of its collection, was bought by a private collector.

Bone (Box) of Contention: The James Ossuary

4. The inscription appeared pristine compared with the rest of the carved frame area.

Furthermore, the box's decorations--the carved "frame" Lemaire referred to which outlines all four sides, plus the circular designs--are badly worn, whereas the inscription seems almost pristine. That is, the decorations are blurred, partially effaced, and (like much of the surface) pitted. Yet the lettering is entirely distinct and blessed with sharp edges, as if it were of recent vintage. My colleagues and I were all struck with that observation. So was an Israeli engineering professor, Dr. Daniel Eylon, of the University of Dayton, who noted that "sharp edges do not last 2,000 years."

Bone (Box) of Contention: The James Ossuary

This is an interesting find. Hardly conclusive. Very likely a forgery.

[edit on 14-9-2008 by Deaf Alien]

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 12:57 AM
LOL!!!!! Of course the Jews claimed it false. They don't ACCEPT Jesus Christ.

They have been denying Him for 2,042 years.

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 01:00 AM

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
LOL!!!!! Of course the Jews claimed it false. They don't ACCEPT Jesus Christ.

They have been denying Him for 2,042 years.

So, you didn't read the rest of it? You read the word IAA and automatically assumed that the rest is crap? You had to bring Jews into this?

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 01:36 AM
This is why Religion is a bad thing for the world.

People get very wrapped up emotionally on the fact Jesus is more than a normal man. I beleive he did exist and I beleive that stories were written and a religion was formed around him.

However.......Religion in itself......conceals the truth from people and controls people. My point to saying this is that no matter what......evidence is never good enough and people beleive what they want......no matter what is in front of their eyes.

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 01:50 AM
[conceals the truth from people and controls people.]

I would agree that organized religion does do that ..
The Jews and the Romans were organized religions back in the day ..So you know they concealed alot of info on Christ and him crucified .And his rising from the dead .

No way would they want any such info to get out .

As you know they KILLED alot of the Apostles after Christ died ..
Did they exist ? And if so then why would they kill those men ? IF there was no Jesus Christ who died and rose again ?They wouldnt ..In fact they killed them so that they could not keep telling others what they knew and saw ....
They tried very hard to destroy all evidence of Jesus Christ ..of course it failed because you cant really stop word of mouth ..neither can they stop every thing written from getting passed around between relatives and friends etc ....

Wouldnt you do your best to hide any evidence if you were the Gov of that time and you did what they did ?

Look how yall feel now about how our Gov conceals everything they can from us about their dirty deeds ..and for sure any real evidence is pretty darn scarce if it has anything to do with their dirty dealings ...(yet there is still some of us who are not falling for all the lies and BS our Gov feeds us on a daily basis ....and this movement is growing isnt it .inspite of them trying to suppress info etc) ..just like the Apostles and the people who followed Christ did )
Why is it so hard to believe that they would not do that same thing back then ?

Look at how successful the Catholic Church was in suppressing info from the days of the Crusades (not to mention many ancient texts and documents that I am sure would prove everything biblical and are now stashed in the Vatican Archives) ........They did the same thing back then I am sure ...

[edit on 14-9-2008 by Simplynoone]

[edit on 14-9-2008 by Simplynoone]

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 03:19 AM

Originally posted by Simplynoone
As you know they KILLED alot of the Apostles after Christ died ..
Did they exist ? And if so then why would they kill those men ? IF there was no Jesus Christ who died and rose again ?They wouldnt ..In fact they killed them so that they could not keep telling others what they knew and saw ....
They tried very hard to destroy all evidence of Jesus Christ ..of course it failed because you cant really stop word of mouth ..neither can they stop every thing written from getting passed around between relatives and friends etc ....

Why not think of your entire point before you start typing? This would lead to the prevention of such logical inconsistencies as "Did they exist?" and "they tried very hard to destroy all evidence of Jesus Christ...". If you don't even know if they existed, how can you assert that?

Originally posted by SimplynooneWouldnt you do your best to hide any evidence if you were the Gov of that time and you did what they did ?

Look how yall feel now about how our Gov conceals everything they can from us about their dirty deeds ..and for sure any real evidence is pretty darn scarce if it has anything to do with their dirty dealings ...(yet there is still some of us who are not falling for all the lies and BS our Gov feeds us on a daily basis ....and this movement is growing isnt it .inspite of them trying to suppress info etc) ..just like the Apostles and the people who followed Christ did )
Why is it so hard to believe that they would not do that same thing back then ?

Why is it so hard to believe the whole thing is simply made up? An adaptation of Egyptian, and probably Babylonian, astrological records equates to your messiah. The rest is just gravy.

For instance: why the hell would Jesus have exiled the "demon" (and I'm glad I could clear your issues on demons up too) Legion into a herd of swine? How? WTF was a herd of swine doing in Judaic (and therefore, non-pig-eating) areas? God's decreed these animals unclean, so we'll just keep a 2000-strong herd of them around to ensure we remember how unclean they really are? And we never eat bacon sandwiches - alright!

Originally posted by SimplynooneLook at how successful the Catholic Church was in suppressing info from the days of the Crusades (not to mention many ancient texts and documents that I am sure would prove everything biblical and are now stashed in the Vatican Archives) ........They did the same thing back then I am sure ...

I'm sure they have documents that would utterly undo the faith, which is precisely why the Vatican - lets be clear, the central nexus of the Catholic faith - is hiding them, not because they prove a damn thing.

Don't you think the Vatican would have an express interest in getting any actual evidence of Jesus or his waffle into the public domain? If it was actual, uncontestable proof, they'd be ranting about it and waving it from the rooftops.

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 06:49 AM
Yeah, he existed alright. No getting around that.

All the rest of the other stuff about Jesus is up to us, individually; we should learn to accept & respect this

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 09:26 AM
[Don't you think the Vatican would have an express interest in getting any actual evidence of Jesus or his waffle into the public domain? If it was actual, uncontestable proof, they'd be ranting about it and waving it from the rooftops.]

No they would not ..they believe in a mystical Jesus ...and what Jesus stood for is pretty contrary to everything that the Catholic church stands for ...The Pope and Mary would be at the bottom of the totem pole if catholics really believed that Jesus was real ...There is so much idolatry in the Catholic Church and Christ preached more about idol worship than just about anything else ....

Jesus teachings are completely contrary to that of the Pope and the Entire Catholic belief system .....

I mean really ...guess you may not have even read any of the bible ..because if you did you would know that ...

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 10:36 AM

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
The skeptics will find 200 + reasons to still claim Jesus Christ didn't exist.

jesus may have existed...that doesnt however mean he was the son of god..find proof for that and im all ears..

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 11:19 AM

Originally posted by Simplynoone
No they would not ..they believe in a mystical Jesus

As do most Christians. It's pretty much an entry requirement: Jesus was the son of God. That's quite mythic, IMO.

Originally posted by Simplynoone...and what Jesus stood for is pretty contrary to everything that the Catholic church stands for

Not really, he really stood against what the Catholic church did, back in the day, and almost the entire concept of "church" as a hierarchical organisation. But the Catholics aren't the only guilty party, so why point the finger on the issue?

Originally posted by Simplynoone...The Pope and Mary would be at the bottom of the totem pole if catholics really believed that Jesus was real ...There is so much idolatry in the Catholic Church and Christ preached more about idol worship than just about anything else ....

Christ, as the bible portays him, says very little about idolatry. Most of the idolatry-schtick is in the OT. I guess by the time of the NT the Jews had finally grasped that "Idolatry=Bad", and so the message was then "Jesus=Good" instead.

Originally posted by SimplynooneI mean really ...guess you may not have even read any of the bible ..because if you did you would know that ...

Actually I've read the whole New and Old testaments, cover to cover, multiple times. The stories fascinate me, especially as an insight into ancient history - strip away the dogma, and you end up with a very interesting picture of how life was in the Middle East around those time periods. Amazing stuff.

I especially enjoy the conquest of Canaan - when I first read that, I was staggered. I thought that the godly-types were all nice, fluffy and kind, not genocidal maniacs. And kids are encouraged to read it!

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 12:22 PM
I cant even go into all the Catholic Church does that is contrary to the word of God..(That would take all day ) ..
Besides we are getting way off topic with that one .

I have to go for awhile
I will get back to you later CC ok ..have a nice day .

12