What if Jesus tomb was found

[Kaliden]

Hardcore religious people are just people who want answers. People would like to know "why" so bad they'll believe almost anything put in front of them. Native Americans believed that a giant spider caused the sun to rise, because at the time there was no other explanation for the event.
I'm not justifying them going around condemning everyone to hell for not believing what they believe, but they give some people a reason to live. I say if you don't believe it, hell don't believe it, but don't go out of your way to make the world feel like you. And if your religious bible thumping is only gonna make atheists want to prove you wrong even more.
If it matters I praise Yin :D

[DarktaruFM]

it think zealotryhas more to do with the feeling of loneliness the person has and how that zealotry gives him a reason to live due to him being too scared to deal with his own reality; thus trying to solve everyone elses life with X or Y thing.

[Xfaustx]

soooo theres a show about this on Discovery Channel on Sunday night.

[DarktaruFM]

that show was what originated the discussion

[Andarvi]

If you have been even remotely educated on what evolution is and still choose to not beleive it, one of the following three is the only possible scenario.

1 - your teacher was awful.
2 - you are delusional.
3 - you are retarded.

Call me whatever you want, but this is one thing that to argue against is absolutely ridiculous and reflects you living in a fantasy world. The "theory" of evolution is far more plausible than the theory of "insert any major religion."

[Enkidu]

You are correct. There are enough texts outside the bible suggesting that Jesus was killed by the romans.

This is false. there are no official roman execution records for jesus. Any text that makes reference to jesus or his death shows up at least 7 decades after the alleged event. hearsay is not evidence. If you want to say all the records have been destroyed/lost/stolen, then fine. Otherwise, do some research.

There aren't Roman death records, but there is Josephus' mention of Jesus and James. Saying they're "forged" is nothing but a cover. Of course it seems as though Josephus says too many good things about Jesus, however removing all mention of Jesus would make for an incomplete book. You'd have to argue that some Christian copyist completely re-wrote these books to include mentions of Jesus and James, that's quite a stretch.

There's also the letters of Pliny the Younger from around 100AD complaining about Christians. ~70 years after Jesus' supposed death and there were zealots... If Jesus was truly just a myth (ie. even the historical Jesus taking away any miracles), then it was masterfully planned. And seemingly for no real reason... Of course you can liken it to those crazy Scientologists, yet there is a reason for that - money. Early Christians didn't have money and were being killed for their beliefs, I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

[Xavier]

I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

I dunno, he did jump on the sofa for Katie.

[Jimmayus]

I highly doubt most people who consider themselves Christians would die a zealots death now, most would consider it insane. Hell, sailors in the 19th century would rather stamp on the cross and renounce Christianity than die in Japan. Funny how sacrifice and dying for your beliefs is what made Christianity such a pain in Roman authority in the first place.

[quannum]

Any text that makes reference to jesus or his death shows up at least 7 decades after the alleged event. hearsay is not evidence.

There aren't Roman death records, but there is Josephus' mention of Jesus and James. Saying they're "forged" is nothing but a cover.

a cover? what part of 'born 37 years AD' don't you get. claiming it as a forgery done by esubius (sp?) is the opinion of the catholic church expressed by Bishop Warburton circa 1770. You can find this stuff with just a couple minutes of google or wiki search.

There's also the letters of Pliny the Younger from around 100AD complaining about Christians. ~70 years after Jesus' supposed death and there were zealots...

Pliny was born ~70 years AD. again anything he wrote is just hearsay, not a first person account of events. You can't find one contemporary account of some controversal dude named jesus who was causing trouble at the jewish temples for the money changers or who drew large crowds whenever he orated a parable or held audience with pilate. For such a famous dude their are zero contemporary accounts of any of it ... except for the bible of course.

If Jesus was truly just a myth (ie. even the historical Jesus taking away any miracles), then it was masterfully planned. And seemingly for no real reason... Of course you can liken it to those crazy Scientologists, yet there is a reason for that - money. Early Christians didn't have money and were being killed for their beliefs, I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

Scientology is a perfect example of how gullible people are. hubbard started it up as a poker bet.

my guess as to the actual origins: master planning didn't come till constantine in the 300s. but it started as a cult by paul. at the time there were lots of cults. in rome you either believed in the roman gods or you were a jew. and their would be a cult of bacchus or mars or whatever. the many stories of jesus all existed before with a different hero from osirus, dionysus or mithras, look up syncretism if you don't believe me.

edit: watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnFobYlsF4
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffC1S6tgfw

[Saga]

Any text that makes reference to jesus or his death shows up at least 7 decades after the alleged event. hearsay is not evidence.

There aren't Roman death records, but there is Josephus' mention of Jesus and James. Saying they're "forged" is nothing but a cover.

a cover? what part of 'born 37 years AD' don't you get. claiming it as a forgery done by esubius (sp?) is the opinion of the catholic church expressed by Bishop Warburton circa 1770. You can find this stuff with just a couple minutes of google or wiki search.

There's also the letters of Pliny the Younger from around 100AD complaining about Christians. ~70 years after Jesus' supposed death and there were zealots...

Pliny was born ~70 years AD. again anything he wrote is just hearsay, not a first person account of events. You can't find one contemporary account of some controversal dude named jesus who was causing trouble at the jewish temples for the money changers or who drew large crowds whenever he orated a parable or held audience with pilate. For such a famous dude their are zero contemporary accounts of any of it ... except for the bible of course.

If Jesus was truly just a myth (ie. even the historical Jesus taking away any miracles), then it was masterfully planned. And seemingly for no real reason... Of course you can liken it to those crazy Scientologists, yet there is a reason for that - money. Early Christians didn't have money and were being killed for their beliefs, I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

Scientology is a perfect example of how gullible people are. hubbard started it up as a poker bet.

my guess as to the actual origins: master planning didn't come till constantine in the 300s. but it started as a cult by paul. at the time there were lots of cults. in rome you either believed in the roman gods or you were a jew. and their would be a cult of bacchus or mars or whatever. the many stories of jesus all existed before with a different hero from osirus, dionysus or mithras, look up syncretism if you don't believe me.

edit: watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnFobYlsF4
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffC1S6tgfw

Claiming the bible is "contemporary" proves you're a fucking idiot. What the hell kind of a definition of contemporary are you using? It sure as fuck isn't "current." Religion is a joke, and you're just as gullible as the people that believe in scientology are. There's the Bible, the Torah, the Kiran, there's Buddhism, Daoism, Shindoism, and dozens more I'm forgetting. They all, more or less, believe in something different. Who the fuck is right? No one. You don't know for damn certain that the Bible IS God's word. It was written by a human. Humans have the capacity to be cruel, corrupt, be malicious, make errors. No one's to say Christianity isn't just a large-scale version of Scientology.

Start questioning your beliefs and quit blindly following something just because it gives you an easy answer.

[Maguspk]

Any text that makes reference to jesus or his death shows up at least 7 decades after the alleged event. hearsay is not evidence.

There aren't Roman death records, but there is Josephus' mention of Jesus and James. Saying they're "forged" is nothing but a cover.

a cover? what part of 'born 37 years AD' don't you get. claiming it as a forgery done by esubius (sp?) is the opinion of the catholic church expressed by Bishop Warburton circa 1770. You can find this stuff with just a couple minutes of google or wiki search.

There's also the letters of Pliny the Younger from around 100AD complaining about Christians. ~70 years after Jesus' supposed death and there were zealots...

Pliny was born ~70 years AD. again anything he wrote is just hearsay, not a first person account of events. You can't find one contemporary account of some controversal dude named jesus who was causing trouble at the jewish temples for the money changers or who drew large crowds whenever he orated a parable or held audience with pilate. For such a famous dude their are zero contemporary accounts of any of it ... except for the bible of course.

If Jesus was truly just a myth (ie. even the historical Jesus taking away any miracles), then it was masterfully planned. And seemingly for no real reason... Of course you can liken it to those crazy Scientologists, yet there is a reason for that - money. Early Christians didn't have money and were being killed for their beliefs, I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

Scientology is a perfect example of how gullible people are. hubbard started it up as a poker bet.

my guess as to the actual origins: master planning didn't come till constantine in the 300s. but it started as a cult by paul. at the time there were lots of cults. in rome you either believed in the roman gods or you were a jew. and their would be a cult of bacchus or mars or whatever. the many stories of jesus all existed before with a different hero from osirus, dionysus or mithras, look up syncretism if you don't believe me.

edit: watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnFobYlsF4
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffC1S6tgfw

Claiming the bible is "contemporary" proves you're a fucking idiot. What the hell kind of a definition of contemporary are you using? It sure as fuck isn't "current." Religion is a joke, and you're just as gullible as the people that believe in scientology are. There's the Bible, the Torah, the Kiran, there's Buddhism, Daoism, Shindoism, and dozens more I'm forgetting. They all, more or less, believe in something different. Who the fuck is right? No one. You don't know for damn certain that the Bible IS God's word. It was written by a human. Humans have the capacity to be cruel, corrupt, be malicious, make errors. No one's to say Christianity isn't just a large-scale version of Scientology.

Start questioning your beliefs and quit blindly following something just because it gives you an easy answer.

... Christianity is one of, if not the, largest religion in the world. I consider that current, strictly speaking according to facts.

I love the argument you put forth though, there is no proof, so believe something else with no proof!

Also @ whoever said if you don't believe the evolutionary theory you're dumb: That's a pretty broad statement, you consider yourself smarter and more insightful than even some of the greatest minds who choose not to believe every theory just because it makes some sense? I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

[Xavier]

I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

Evolution isn't really that farfetched or radical.

[quannum]

For such a famous dude their are zero contemporary accounts of any of it ... except for the bible of course.
edit: watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnFobYlsF4
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffC1S6tgfw

Claiming the bible is "contemporary" proves you're a fucking idiot. What the hell kind of a definition of contemporary are you using? It sure as fuck isn't "current." Religion is a joke, and you're just as gullible as the people that believe in scientology are. There's the Bible, the Torah, the Kiran, there's Buddhism, Daoism, Shindoism, and dozens more I'm forgetting. They all, more or less, believe in something different. Who the fuck is right? No one. You don't know for damn certain that the Bible IS God's word. It was written by a human. Humans have the capacity to be cruel, corrupt, be malicious, make errors. No one's to say Christianity isn't just a large-scale version of Scientology.

Start questioning your beliefs and quit blindly following something just because it gives you an easy answer.

woah easy there, calm down. have some bean dip. try reading the thread or visiting the links before responding. did you even read my full post lol. I'll include the sarcasm tags next time just for you.

[Saga]

Any text that makes reference to jesus or his death shows up at least 7 decades after the alleged event. hearsay is not evidence.

There aren't Roman death records, but there is Josephus' mention of Jesus and James. Saying they're "forged" is nothing but a cover.

a cover? what part of 'born 37 years AD' don't you get. claiming it as a forgery done by esubius (sp?) is the opinion of the catholic church expressed by Bishop Warburton circa 1770. You can find this stuff with just a couple minutes of google or wiki search.

There's also the letters of Pliny the Younger from around 100AD complaining about Christians. ~70 years after Jesus' supposed death and there were zealots...

Pliny was born ~70 years AD. again anything he wrote is just hearsay, not a first person account of events. You can't find one contemporary account of some controversal dude named jesus who was causing trouble at the jewish temples for the money changers or who drew large crowds whenever he orated a parable or held audience with pilate. For such a famous dude their are zero contemporary accounts of any of it ... except for the bible of course.

If Jesus was truly just a myth (ie. even the historical Jesus taking away any miracles), then it was masterfully planned. And seemingly for no real reason... Of course you can liken it to those crazy Scientologists, yet there is a reason for that - money. Early Christians didn't have money and were being killed for their beliefs, I don't think Tom Cruise would jump in the guillotine for Xenu.

Scientology is a perfect example of how gullible people are. hubbard started it up as a poker bet.

my guess as to the actual origins: master planning didn't come till constantine in the 300s. but it started as a cult by paul. at the time there were lots of cults. in rome you either believed in the roman gods or you were a jew. and their would be a cult of bacchus or mars or whatever. the many stories of jesus all existed before with a different hero from osirus, dionysus or mithras, look up syncretism if you don't believe me.

edit: watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lnFobYlsF4
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffC1S6tgfw

Claiming the bible is "contemporary" proves you're a fucking idiot. What the hell kind of a definition of contemporary are you using? It sure as fuck isn't "current." Religion is a joke, and you're just as gullible as the people that believe in scientology are. There's the Bible, the Torah, the Kiran, there's Buddhism, Daoism, Shindoism, and dozens more I'm forgetting. They all, more or less, believe in something different. Who the fuck is right? No one. You don't know for damn certain that the Bible IS God's word. It was written by a human. Humans have the capacity to be cruel, corrupt, be malicious, make errors. No one's to say Christianity isn't just a large-scale version of Scientology.

Start questioning your beliefs and quit blindly following something just because it gives you an easy answer.

... Christianity is one of, if not the, largest religion in the world. I consider that current, strictly speaking according to facts.

I love the argument you put forth though, there is no proof, so believe something else with no proof!

Also @ whoever said if you don't believe the evolutionary theory you're dumb: That's a pretty broad statement, you consider yourself smarter and more insightful than even some of the greatest minds who choose not to believe every theory just because it makes some sense? I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

Uh, popularity of a religion has nothing to do with how contemporary the evidence supporting it is. Christianity is one of the biggest religions in the world - that's wonderful, I agree. Calling the Bible's content "contemporary" though, is a total joke.

And providing proof is completely pointless at this stage, since everyone seems to have some other sort of "proof" to vomit back in the other person's direction. Just don't believe in something without questioning it is all I'm saying. If you blindly follow something without knowing why or whether you agree with it, there might as well be no proof at all since you're just a mindless drone listening to a damn book.

The problem with your example in your argument in evolution, though, is that there hasn't been extensive study and theories and evidence provided to support your solid granite planet idea. Evolution has evidence and has had thorough tests and experiments done in order to support it. People just aren't willing to accept that what they've believed in for so long is incorrect.

It's like people who deny global warming is happening - there's countless tests, graphs, charts, evidence, research done and experiments performed; technology's come a goddamn long way since the bith of the entire fucking universe, and people covering their ears, kneeling down and going "LALALALALALALALALA" when presented with something concrete and LOGICAL (fun word) are, at this point at least, on par with Holocaust deniers.

[DarktaruFM]

Calling the Bible's content "contemporary" though, is a total joke.

The book itself is not contemporary, what it teaches is. thats imo tho

Im not talking about the "Christian" view, but the spiritual and psychological aspects

[Mystywysty]

... Christianity is one of, if not the, largest religion in the world. I consider that current, strictly speaking according to facts.

I love the argument you put forth though, there is no proof, so believe something else with no proof!

Also @ whoever said if you don't believe the evolutionary theory you're dumb: That's a pretty broad statement, you consider yourself smarter and more insightful than even some of the greatest minds who choose not to believe every theory just because it makes some sense? I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

You make the mistake of attributing the meaning of theory in popular view as the same one the scientific community use when they speak of theories. The former meaning is often taken to simply mean something that is unproven whereas the latter has a distinct meaning. A scientific theory is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948)

[Maguspk]

... Christianity is one of, if not the, largest religion in the world. I consider that current, strictly speaking according to facts.

I love the argument you put forth though, there is no proof, so believe something else with no proof!

Also @ whoever said if you don't believe the evolutionary theory you're dumb: That's a pretty broad statement, you consider yourself smarter and more insightful than even some of the greatest minds who choose not to believe every theory just because it makes some sense? I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

You make the mistake of attributing the meaning of theory in popular view as the same one the scientific community use when they speak of theories. The former meaning is often taken to simply mean something that is unproven whereas the latter has a distinct meaning. A scientific theory is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948)

You do realize those two definitions are equivalent?

[Saga]

... Christianity is one of, if not the, largest religion in the world. I consider that current, strictly speaking according to facts.

I love the argument you put forth though, there is no proof, so believe something else with no proof!

Also @ whoever said if you don't believe the evolutionary theory you're dumb: That's a pretty broad statement, you consider yourself smarter and more insightful than even some of the greatest minds who choose not to believe every theory just because it makes some sense? I have this theory, 2 galaxies away in the 3rd rotation around a star there is a planet made of solid granite. Believe that please, it makes perfect sense and you can't prove otherwise.

You make the mistake of attributing the meaning of theory in popular view as the same one the scientific community use when they speak of theories. The former meaning is often taken to simply mean something that is unproven whereas the latter has a distinct meaning. A scientific theory is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948)

You do realize those two definitions are equivalent?

I think I see where he's coming from, and while they are almost exactly the same, the discrepancy in definition lies in who's viewing the theory. When looking at a theory, there's two perspectives: the public, or the people's perspective, and then the scientific perspective - the ones proposing these theories. The public is going to be generally less educated on a theory - we'll use global warming as an example - and cite some arbitrary ideal as the source for their disbelief. Therefore, in the people's eyes, a theory is proven or disproven based on personal opinion.

Scientifically, a theory is proven or disproven based on _fact_. If you can grasp that concept - that theory is identified, defined, and proven or disproven differently in the general public's eyes than in the scientific field, you'll see what Mystywysty was trying to say.

At least that's what I think. Mysty, please correct me if I inferred incorrectly.

[Mystywysty]

To put it simply. Most people think a theory is simply a guess. For a scientist, a theory is something that has been proven and for the most part is accepted as being true. For something to become a scientific theory, it must be developed through the scientific method.

[Sefier]

What would happen is Jesus tomb was found?

Nothing would happen. We'd continue to live the same as we did before his skeletal remains were found. Oh and thered be alot of crazy Christians screaming "BLASTPHOMY!"

win?



btw: religion is crap, and its a just an excuse to keep order in the world