The Lost Tomb of Jesus

[SoonerGirl06]

Did anyone watch this tonight and what are your thoughts?

[jacru]

If it isn't empty, it isn't His. Yeesssss!!! :D

[SoonerGirl06]

If it isn't empty, it isn't His. Yeesssss!!! :D

Well they definitely put the spin on the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdelan and the birth of a son.

[proud gonzo]

i just want to post in this thread before it goes all to ****.

[SoonerTerry]

Did anyone watch this tonight and what are your thoughts?

Wheres that damn remote, before I get banned to hell..
;)

[soonerboomer93]

ibtgth

[OU4LIFE]

I thought it was interesting. Worth watching.

[Xstnlsooner]

More crap just like The Di Vinci Code based upon extremely poor
scholarship that ignores the overwhelming evidence that contradicts it!

[OU4LIFE]

dude, you just described the Bible.

;)

[Okla-homey]

Its called "faith" because there needn't be any tangible evidence of its truth. They can make all the movies they want. I know who my Deliverer is and His power and majesty is not diminished by such productions.

I'm out.

[crawfish]

I'll come back for page 3.

[landrun]

One of the scientist called it archie-porn after the 'movie'.
Knowing what I know about the gospels I call it total nonsense - at least the 'logical reasoning' they used to reach their conclusions.

And the statistical thing was nonsense.

There is not one scientist, theologian, historian or archaeologist that would say Jesus ever had a brother named Matthew or that Mary ever had a son named Matthew. They then say, trying to persuade the uninformed, that there is an 'obscure genealogy' of Jesus in the book of Luke that is 'overlooked' by people. - Which is total nonsense and is either blatantly dishonest or blatant stupidity - I think the first. Anybody who has ever studied Jesus life knows about the gospel of Luke's account of Jesus genealogy. They then claim that Mary had a son named Matthew in spite of the fact that it is total nonsense to anyone except these movie makers.

So, what we have is someone in the 'tomb' that is NOT is Jesus' family. And they go to great lengths to argue that it is (in spite of all scientific and historical evidence). They then say, when computing their 'percentage' that they're being 'conservative' when they remove this ossuary from their mathematical formula.

What happens to your theory (not to mention your formula) when you have a person in the 'family tomb' that isn't part of Mary's and Joseph's family. - and everyone knows it.

The most laughable part was when they say that Jesus is speaking to his son on the cross when he speaking to the Apostle John.

[Xstnlsooner]

dude, you just described the Bible.

;)

Harry, this statement just shows how little you know about
the Bible DUDE!

[OU4LIFE]

DUDE, pay more attention to the WINKY FACE!

it denotes sarcasm.

[Xstnlsooner]

SORRY! just now downing me first cup of joe and I'm not hitting
on all cylinders yet!

[Xstnlsooner]

BTW I think the "tour" is supposed to play at Cimarron Trails tomorrow...

[TUSooner]

More stale, pseudo-archaeological fantasy.


I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God.

[Howzit]

Harry, this statement just shows how little you know about
the Bible DUDE!

If, by 'the Bible' you mean 'golf, Dean Koontz, paintball, and UFC Championship fighting' I agree.

[OKLA21FAN]

i thought the 'after show' was a waste of time, as they really didnt get into a good analysis of the findings.

but the "archie-porn" comment was pretty funny, and i was just waiting for some sort of 'Geraldo' and 'Al Capone's vault' comment to follow!

[Hatfield]

missed it, but i am sure it will play again...and again....

[BoogercountySooner]

Did they say how many other boxes said Jesus or Mary on them in the tomb. Our minister yesterday addressed this and said that there were other boxes in the same tomb that said Jesus and Mary on them. I dont know where he got his info from but I would believe before I would believe a scientist. They did DNA test on the remains. What did they compare the results to? As stated before if was Jesus Christ tomb it would have been empty.

[Hatfield]

wait....are you saying your minister thinks jesus was cloned? :)

(and the dna tests were to determine if the people in the tomb were related)

[OKLA21FAN]

Did they say how many other boxes said Jesus or Mary on them in the tomb. Our minister yesterday addressed this and said that there were other boxes in the same tomb thaat said Jesus and Mary on them. I dont know where he got his info from but I would believe before I would believe a scientist. They did DNA test on the remains. What did they compare the results to? As stated before if was Jesus Christ tomb it would have been empty.


and we are off!

[Xstnlsooner]

FYI...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/26/AR2007022600442.html

[OklahomaTuba]

Its called "faith" because there needn't be any tangible evidence of its truth. They can make all the movies they want. I know who my Deliverer is and His power and majesty is not diminished by such productions.

I'm out.

A belief in Jesus transends faith, as there are literally dozens of sources of information regarding the events surrounding the life of Jesus outside of the Bible itself. Although, the books of the New Testament are pretty good sources for historical information.

[OU4LIFE]

BTW I think the "tour" is supposed to play at Cimarron Trails tomorrow...

Does that include you and Matt?

as bad as I am playing right now, this is your best chance to fleece me. I couldn't beat anyone right now.

it's really bad.

[landrun]

Did they say how many other boxes said Jesus or Mary on them in the tomb. Our minister yesterday addressed this and said that there were other boxes in the same tomb that said Jesus and Mary on them. I dont know where he got his info from but I would believe before I would believe a scientist. They did DNA test on the remains. What did they compare the results to? As stated before if was Jesus Christ tomb it would have been empty.

There were no other ossuaries with 'Mary' on them from their movie. Only 2.
And the only DNA they presented was evidence that the tombs of one of the Mary's (one they claim is Mary Magdalene) and Jesus are not related. Hence the indisputable proof that they're married. :rolleyes: (which was pointed out as a less than realistic 'assumption' in the critical show afterward)

[OU4LIFE]

If, by 'the Bible' you mean 'golf, Dean Koontz, paintball, and UFC Championship fighting' I agree.


dude, you TOTALLY left out "pleasing a woman".

[Mjcpr]

as bad as I am playing right now, this is your best chance to fleece me. I couldn't beat anyone right now.

Sweet!

[BlondeSoonerGirl]

This thread is funny.

[picasso]

does Leo DiCaprio die at the end? if so, then I'll try and catch the last part of it.

Hairy, I found a Johnny Miller golf book at the flea market over the weekend. published 1976, he uses quite the weak grip but preaches it loudly.

[OU4LIFE]

so does that mean you are playing tomorrow?

[Xstnlsooner]

I'm playing and I think Pablo is too...

[Xstnlsooner]

This thread is funny.

What!!? you no like the way we're sticking to the subject?

lol:P

[OU4LIFE]

bring your bible punks, you'll be needing some divine intervention to beat me. :)

[bri]

This thread is funny.

Man, a few years ago, I'd be going crazygonuts in here, p*ssing off some fundies. Now, it's like I don't even have the desire to be a contrarian degenerate. :D

[Xstnlsooner]

Actually, I'm far from a fundamentalist. I consider myself evangelical with
charismatic, neo-orthodox and existential undertones...

:pop:

[Howzit]

Actually, I'm far from a fundamentalist. I consider myself evangelical with charismatic, neo-orthodox and existential underwear...



What color?

[leavingthezoo]

i don't buy into any of this, but i am curious as to why there can't be a tomb anywhere with the remains of Jesus in it. i mean, the first time his tomb was empty because He rose to walk with the living again. i've always kind of assumed his bodily remains would be buried, or whatever when he left the earth 'cause why would he need the bag o' bones where He went?

[OKLA21FAN]

i don't buy into any of this, but i am curious as to why there can't be a tomb anywhere with the remains of Jesus in it. i mean, the first time his tomb was empty because He rose to walk with the living again. i've always kind of assumed his bodily remains would be buried, or whatever when he left the earth 'cause why would he need the bag o' bones where He went?
'Ascension' might have something to say about that (Mark 16:19 & Luke 24:50)

[Xstnlsooner]

What color?

Pink!! of course!

[leavingthezoo]

'Ascension' might have something to say about that (Mark 16:19 & Luke 24:50)

i just read the verses and nothing about taking the flesh with the soul. i'm not so passionate about this i'll argue about it, though. just throwin' out another thought on the subject.

[BoogercountySooner]

I didn't see the show so I was just going off what was said at my church on Sunday. It would be very hard for anyone to prove this or disprove this for sure. I was just repeating what was told me. I sure don't want to get into any argumentative debates on this subject.

[OKLA21FAN]

i just read the verses and nothing about taking the flesh with the soul. i'm not so passionate about this i'll argue about it, though. just throwin' out another thought on the subject.
yea,
and thats the rub for many

'physical' verses 'metophoric' resurrection and ascention

[Hatfield]

'Ascension' might have something to say about that (Mark 16:19 & Luke 24:50)


and who says that the interpretation of that is lost in translation where it just means his spiritual body ascended?

who knows/cares just think it is crazy that people would let something like this shatter their faith

[OU4LIFE]

'Ascension' might have something to say about that (Mark 16:19 & Luke 24:50)

I see nothing in either of those passages that says that He would be taking His earthly body to heaven to sit at the right hand of God. With as many things in the Bible that are left open to translation, I have no problem in believing these passages to refer to His spiritual being as opposed to His earthly vessel.

IMO it changes nothing even IF this find were to be confirmed as the tomb of Jesus final remains.

[MamaMia]

I watched the program and the debate afterward. I found the discovery to be compelling, especially the part about the symbol with the ^ with the dot below it.

Well either way, we may never know, in this life time anyway, all of the facts surrounding Jesus, His death, the goings on at His tomb or His spiritual and or physical ascension into Heaven. There have been so many things left out and taken out of the biblical writings that Christians must depend on their faith, the Holy Spirit and their gift of discernment for understanding. The language which the authors of the bible used to write the messages is so different from our own, that the exact meaning of so many verses has been lost in translation. This is one reason why faith plays such a huge part in ones salvation. The bottom line for me, and I'm sure for many other Christians as well, is that even though I find all these archaeological findings interesting, nothing will change my belief in Jesus. While believers experience everlasting life now as a present possession, they look forward to the resurrection when they will at last be immortal and incorruptible in body as well as in soul.

[Hamhock]

an important part of salvation is belief that Christ is resurrected.

if it was only a spiritual ascension, how would that differ from anyone else dying and going to heaven?

imo, according to the Bible, if there was no resurrection/ascension, there is no salvation

[leavingthezoo]

an important part of salvation is belief that Christ is resurrected.

if it was only a spiritual ascension, how would that differ from anyone else dying and going to heaven?

imo, according to the Bible, if there was no resurrection/ascension, there is no salvation

i'm not saying either, or. i'm saying both. he was resurrected with scars to impress the chicks and everything. but it says multiple times thoughout scripture that flesh and bones are an earthly cloak. so i'm just saying, for me, it doesn't make sense to drag those thing up to the spirit in the sky... ascension or not. [/shrug]

[Hatfield]

an important part of salvation is belief that Christ is resurrected.

if it was only a spiritual ascension, how would that differ from anyone else dying and going to heaven?

imo, according to the Bible, if there was no resurrection/ascension, there is no salvation

but the resurrection and ascention are not the same thing.

they happened at different times so theoretically he could have risen and then at a later point in time had his spiritual body ascend.

[MamaMia]

but the resurrection and ascention are not the same thing.

they happened at different times so theoretically he could have risen and then at a later point in time had his spiritual body ascend.If you think there is a possibility that the spiritual body of Jesus could have ascended at a later point than he did, then what part of "he" do you think rose first? :confused:

[def_lazer_fc]

If you think there is a possibility that the spiritual body of Jesus could have ascended at a later point than he did, then what part of "he" do you think rose first? :confused:
his man bits?

[leavingthezoo]

If you think there is a possibility that the spiritual body of Jesus could have ascended at a later point than he did, then what part of "he" do you think rose first? :confused:

i think he's saying what i've been saying. the resurrection (Christ rising on the 3rd day, leaving the tomb, etc.) is an entirely different moment than his ascention. therefore, his physical body could have risen for the resurrection, and his spirit/soul ascended without the body- which, would go along with the scriptures description of the souls place in heaven, not the bones and body. but... you know, i doubt any of us can say either way with complete certainty. i just am not seeing where it says anywhere his flesh ascended.

[bri]

but... you know, i doubt any of us can say either way with complete certainty.

If this thread has taught me anything, it's that a few of us feel they can say with complete and absolute certainty. :D

[landrun]

Here's a decent rebuttal of the movie.

It uses their own evidence (provided by the discovery channel and their own experts) to point out some 'less than honest things' from its producer.

http://www.extremetheology.com/

If you thought the movie had some good points, then you need to check it out. If you thought it was bunk, you need to check it out too. :)

[picasso]

what if you didn't watch it (silly Jesus Doc) and you thought Titanic was ghey and over dramatic?