• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has virtually unequivocal evidence[W:577]

Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

I believe your dating is wrong for the Gospels and eyewitnesses. Here's a more scholarly view on that:

A Chronological Order of The New Testament Books

All dates within the probable lifetimes of the Gospel authors and eyewitnesses.

Also, the earliest mention of the resurrection was likely less than a decade after the event.

Earliest Mention of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ « The Righter Report

Okay. So we'll say it was written at those time points. According to J.D. Crossan, the average age of a Palestinian man in these times was 29 years. So let's assume that these are eyewitness accounts. Also, let's assume Jesus did die in 33 A.D. If the Gospel according to Mark was written in 61 A.D. and the average life expectancy was 29 years, that would make him 4 years old at the time of Jesus' death. AND THAT'S THE EARLIEST DATE. John was written in 86 A.D. (your source, not mine). He would have had to have been almost 50 when he was writing this to even have been at the death and resurrection of Jesus if he was a newborn infant when it happened. Oh, and lest we forget, this is in a largely illiterate area. So sure, it makes sense that a four year old in an illiterate area would write down and have perfect recollection from memory (25+ years later mind you) a supernatural story. Yeah. Right. :roll:
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period."

"I never said that, what I said was you can keep your plan until the insurance companies change it"

Delusional defined...your leader


That has literally nothing to do with what I said, but hey, continue with the hackery.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Wow! Stunning....If this is reviewed, and verified, what, and how do you see this effecting Christianity? Especially considering the open attack it is under today?

Many Christians will refuse to believe Jesus was married. Many consider it blasphemy.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Nor does He have a wife and son

Perhaps he did and it was kept from us when the gospel was cherry picked as some scholars say. It would make sense to have Jesus completely experience the human condition first hand. Afterall there is a void of information from childhood up until the age of 30.

A life in our footsteps sure beats virgin unmarried priests giving marriage counseling.
 
Last edited:
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Okay. So we'll say it was written at those time points. According to J.D. Crossan, the average age of a Palestinian man in these times was 29 years.

So let's assume that these are eyewitness accounts. Also, let's assume Jesus did die in 33 A.D. If the Gospel according to Mark was written in 61 A.D. and the average life expectancy was 29 years, that would make him 4 years old at the time of Jesus' death. AND THAT'S THE EARLIEST DATE. John was written in 86 A.D. (your source, not mine). He would have had to have been almost 50 when he was writing this to even have been at the death and resurrection of Jesus if he was a newborn infant when it happened. Oh, and lest we forget, this is in a largely illiterate area. So sure, it makes sense that a four year old in an illiterate area would write down and have perfect recollection from memory (25+ years later mind you) a supernatural story. Yeah. Right. :roll:

I wouldn't consider J.D. Crossan to be believable on a lot of things. He's a classic theological liberal - one of the founders of the theologically liberal "Jesus Seminar," whose members cast colored beads to vote on what they thought was "acceptable." Anything supernatural, like the miracles of Jesus, his resurrection, etc., all went flying out the window - not based on anything objective - but based on their 'a priori' anti-supernatural bias. They love their theories and hypotheses, but from what I've seen there's seldom any historical, archaeological or traditional evidences to back them up. And then they call that "scholarship." :roll:

But back to the issue here -

Herod the Great lived to be 69, and the Jews, perhaps because of their Biblical diets, lived roughly 70 years. And tradition says that the Apostle John lived to be a very old man. "The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away." - Psalm 90:10

We also have the earliest church fathers who verified the traditional Gospel authors, so I don't see where the skeptics have a leg to stand on with the age argument.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Many Christians will refuse to believe Jesus was married. Many consider it blasphemy.

That's because there's zero credible historical evidence of it.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

I wouldn't consider J.D. Crossan to be believable on a lot of things. He's a classic theological liberal - one of the founders of the theologically liberal "Jesus Seminar," whose members cast colored beads to vote on what they thought was "acceptable." Anything supernatural, like the miracles of Jesus, his resurrection, etc., all went flying out the window - not based on anything objective - but based on their 'a priori' anti-supernatural bias. They love their theories and hypotheses, but from what I've seen there's seldom any historical, archaeological or traditional evidences to back them up. And then they call that "scholarship." :roll:

But back to the issue here -

Herod the Great lived to be 69, and the Jews, perhaps because of their Biblical diets, lived roughly 70 years. And tradition says that the Apostle John lived to be a very old man. "The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away." - Psalm 90:10

We also have the earliest church fathers who verified the traditional Gospel authors, so I don't see where the skeptics have a leg to stand on with the age argument.

You did nothing to address the post above besides attack a theologian -- one of your believing ilk. How do you know they lived to be seventy, though? You're a priori assuming that Psalms is stating the truth.

Verified what about them? They existed. Great. That's kind of immaterial. What matters is were they eyewitnesses? Otherwise it's hearsay. I would think there's a pretty strong case for the latter.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

You did nothing to address the post above besides attack a theologian -- one of your believing ilk.

Yes, I did address it.

How do you know they lived to be seventy, though? You're a priori assuming that Psalms is stating the truth.

Verified what about them? They existed. Great. That's kind of immaterial. What matters is were they eyewitnesses? Otherwise it's hearsay. I would think there's a pretty strong case for the latter.

Tradition holds that the apostle John lived to be a very old man.

In addition...

The opinion of scores of scholars verify the earlier dates for the Gospels, and who wrote them.

A Chronological Order of The New Testament Books

One other thing - did you casually dismiss the earliest mention of the resurrection?

http://righterreport.com/2013/01/17/1064/

The 1st Corinthians Creed

“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 15:3-8

As Scholar Gary Habermas notes:

“Even critical scholars usually agree that it has an exceptionally early origin.” Ulrich Wilckens declares that this creed “indubitably goes back to the oldest phase of all in the history of primitive Christianity.” (8) Joachim Jeremias calls it “the earliest tradition of all.” (9) Even the non-Christian scholar Gerd Ludemann says that “I do insist that the discovery of pre-Pauline confessional foundations is one of the great achievements in the New Testament scholarship.”

The majority of scholars who comment think that Paul probably received this information about three years after his conversion, which probably occurred from one to four years after the crucifixion. At that time, Paul visited Jerusalem to speak with Peter and James, each of whom are included in the list of Jesus’ appearances (1 Cor. 15:5, 7; Gal. 1:18–19).This places it at roughly A.D. 32–38.

Even the (liberal) Jesus Seminar co-founder John Dominic Crossan, writes:

“Paul wrote to the Corinthians from Ephesus in the early 50s C.E. But he says in 1 Corinthians 15:3 that “I handed on to you as of first importance which I in turn received.” The most likely source and time for his reception of that tradition would have been Jerusalem in the early 30s when, according to Galatians 1:18, he “went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas [Peter] and stayed with him fifteen days.”


Jesus is Lord!
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Indubitably 30 years later there would be inaccuracies, and that's the point. This has been tested and proven many times throughout history. And not only that, until the Protestant reformation, and better publishing abilities, the corrupt Catholic Church was in control of the "scriptures" and their duplication. Dubious at best.

There are first person inaccuracies in eyewitness accounts.

Here's the distinction. Jesus was one man 2000 years ago with a small contingent of believers following him.

Now, over 2 Billion followers believe he was the son of God and believe the Gospels are true.

Thats either the most succesful PR campaign in History or he is the Messiah.

I chose to believe the latter because I know there's more to my faith than just a belief in the unknown.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

So Peter directly passing down his eyewitness accounts to Mark wouldn't qualify as a eyewitness account ?

As an example I could give eyewitness accounts of things my Grandfather did 30 years ago to my son.

Does that make those accounts false ?

Short answer is no; an account of someone else's eyewitness account is not an eyewitness account.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Okay. So we'll say it was written at those time points. According to J.D. Crossan, the average age of a Palestinian man in these times was 29 years. So let's assume that these are eyewitness accounts. Also, let's assume Jesus did die in 33 A.D. If the Gospel according to Mark was written in 61 A.D. and the average life expectancy was 29 years, that would make him 4 years old at the time of Jesus' death. AND THAT'S THE EARLIEST DATE. John was written in 86 A.D. (your source, not mine). He would have had to have been almost 50 when he was writing this to even have been at the death and resurrection of Jesus if he was a newborn infant when it happened. Oh, and lest we forget, this is in a largely illiterate area. So sure, it makes sense that a four year old in an illiterate area would write down and have perfect recollection from memory (25+ years later mind you) a supernatural story. Yeah. Right. :roll:

Impressive.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

That's because there's zero credible historical evidence of it.

There are a lot of things in the bible that have zero credible evidence too. Can you actually prove Jesus existed? There's also no evidence King Herod killed first born children either. And so on.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

There are a lot of things in the bible that have zero credible evidence too. Can you actually prove Jesus existed?

There's tons of scholarly works around that answer that to the affirmative. In fact, I don't know of any serious historian who denies a 1st century Jesus.

There's also no evidence King Herod killed first born children either. And so on.

Bethlehem was known by the Biblical prophet Micah as one of the smallest communities in all of Judea, so just how many babies 2 years old or younger do you really think there were? Three? Five? Maybe ten?

For the record, Professor William F. Albright, the dean of American archaeology in the Holy Land, estimates that the population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus' birth to be about 300 people (Albright and Mann 1971:19). The number of male children, two years old or younger, would be about six or seven (Maier 1998:178, footnote 25). This would hardly be a newsworthy event in light of what else was going on at the time (Biblearchaeology.org).

Considering all the butchery Herod was involved in, even murdering people in his own family, I don't see the Bethlehem killing as a major news story, especially since CNN and FOX and the other networks didn't even exist back then.

Finally, they don't call an argument from silence (which is what you're making), a logical fallacy, for nothing.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Impressive.

Hardly.

You folks trying to tell me a 50, 60, or 70 year old man couldn't remember a physical resurrection from the dead of a crucified individual?

I still remember quite vividly events and comments from the Vietnam War I was in back some 45 years ago.

So, like I said, it's hardly an impressive argument.
 
Last edited:
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

You folks trying to tell me a 50, 60, or 70 year old man couldn't remember a physical resurrection from the dead of a crucified individual?

To be fair, that sort of thing happens all the time. It would have been easy for them to mistake one such incident for another :)
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

There are a lot of things in the bible that have zero credible evidence too.

There are 83 independently confirmed archaeological facts in the second half of the book of Acts alone.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

There are 83 independently confirmed archaeological facts in the second half of the book of Acts alone.

Yes, they also have archaeological evidence from events inside of many books, their is no evidence for any of the supposed "miracles" or unrealistic claims. Also, I'd love you to back this up.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

So Peter directly passing down his eyewitness accounts to Mark wouldn't qualify as a eyewitness account ?

As an example I could give eyewitness accounts of things my Grandfather did 30 years ago to my son.

Does that make those accounts false ?

No, but if your grandfather says he met god incarnate, we're going to need more evidence. Have you ever played "the telephone game"?

There are 83 independently confirmed archaeological facts in the second half of the book of Acts alone.

Do any of those archaeological facts show that people used to have magical powers?
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Yes, they also have archaeological evidence from events inside of many books, their is no evidence for any of the supposed "miracles" or unrealistic claims. Also, I'd love you to back this up.[/QUOTE]

That would be incorrect.

Here's a confirmed miracle:

http://righterreport.com/2007/07/14/documenting-a-miracle/

Also, miracles have now been documented.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Credibility-Testament-Accounts-Volume/dp/0801039525
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Yes, they also have archaeological evidence from events inside of many books, their is no evidence for any of the supposed "miracles" or unrealistic claims. Also, I'd love you to back this up.

That would be incorrect.

Here's a confirmed miracle:

http://righterreport.com/2007/07/14/documenting-a-miracle/

Also, miracles have now been documented.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Credibility-Testament-Accounts-Volume/dp/0801039525
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Dovkan: Yes, they also have archaeological evidence from events inside of many books, their is no evidence for any of the supposed "miracles" or unrealistic claims. Also, I'd love you to back this up.

That would be incorrect.

Here's a confirmed miracle:

http://righterreport.com/2007/07/14/documenting-a-miracle/

Also, miracles have now been documented.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Credibility-Testament-Accounts-Volume/dp/0801039525
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

Yes, they also have archaeological evidence from events inside of many books, their is no evidence for any of the supposed "miracles" or unrealistic claims.

:shrug: the claim was that there was no evidence for the historicity of the texts. This is not only false, but ridiculously so.

Also, I'd love you to back this up

I'm currently on a business trip and away from my books - but if it truly interests you, message me and when I get back I'll break out the ole materials and send you the appropriate references.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

No, but if your grandfather says he met god incarnate, we're going to need more evidence. Have you ever played "the telephone game"?

The Telephone Game, while a common reference, is a poor analogy to the texts under discussion. A key ingredient of message degradation in the telephone game is the secrecy of transmission - you don't know what was said three people down, no one can hear what you say. This is the opposite of what occurs in an open community sharing events that many of them partook in.

To take a situation you may be more familiar with, it is more like the shared memory of a rifle squad or platoon after a particularly significant event, like the death of a member. Everyone tells where they were when they saw, when they heard, they share their memories of the event, of the lead-up, of the aftermath, etc. The instant one individual tries to dramatically change the story (if he would), the rest of the group quickly interjects and corrects - they know better, they were there. You aren't going to end up with a group who (for example) mis-remembers and has Cpl Jones being killed by a mortar rather than a sniper, or on a different deployment alltogether, or not at all.

Do any of those archaeological facts show that people used to have magical powers?

No - magic had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
 
Re: The lost tomb of Jesus? Scientist claims he has 'virtually unequivocal evidence'

The Telephone Game, while a common reference, is a poor analogy to the texts under discussion. A key ingredient of message degradation in the telephone game is the secrecy of transmission - you don't know what was said three people down, no one can hear what you say. This is the opposite of what occurs in an open community sharing events that many of them partook in.

Indeed.

In addition, in the Telephone Game there is always a moderator or the initial individual who knows the real statement, and corrects any variance in the end. And that's exactly what happens in a society when people try to revise or deny historical accounts. There's a whole society there to keep them honest.
 
Back
Top Bottom