Walter Wayne
Wayne's Words
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,502
Thanks guys to the quick answer to my question, and the link to the previous thread.
Walt
Walt
Possible Earliest Artifact Identifying Jesus?
- Thread starter headscratcher4
- Start date
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
PotatoStew said:
Skeptic that I am, I have to say 'what' test/s?
I do not believe that 'microscopic' examination has become an accepted (sole) method of archeological dating.
I will indeed have to agree that this is an interesting find, beyond the 'hoax' category, when I see some independant analysys.
PotatoStew
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 78
The microscopic analysis shows that the inscription is as old as the box. They probably date it through other methods.
Independent of what? Does the Geological Survey of Israel have some sort of bias that would make them fudge the findings? You make it sound like the thing is being analyzed by tektonics.org or something.
Interesting read
What if the box read:
"Here lie the bones of Yeshua of Nazareth, teacher and prophet, murdered by Pilate"
This thread and my question makes me think of the novel Gospel - a story of a religious scholar whose quest is to find a missing Gospel. The mysterial gospel tells the story of an apostle looking for Jesus's body which was purportedly taken off the cross and entombed in Egypt.
At the ultimate point of the story, on the doorsteps of the tomb, the apostle decides that he really doesn't want to find the body and destroy his faith.
It's a great read.
What if the box read:
"Here lie the bones of Yeshua of Nazareth, teacher and prophet, murdered by Pilate"
This thread and my question makes me think of the novel Gospel - a story of a religious scholar whose quest is to find a missing Gospel. The mysterial gospel tells the story of an apostle looking for Jesus's body which was purportedly taken off the cross and entombed in Egypt.
At the ultimate point of the story, on the doorsteps of the tomb, the apostle decides that he really doesn't want to find the body and destroy his faith.
It's a great read.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
PotatoStew said:
The microscopic analysis shows that the inscription is as old as the box. They probably date it through other methods.
Not exactly the same as " the patina of the box and insription are uniform. i.e. the same age."
There is no information about how age was determined. Only that these types of boxes have only been found to exist in the time frame suspected, and that it contains mold growth similar to that found on other boxes.
Independent of what? Does the Geological Survey of Israel have some sort of bias that would make them fudge the findings? You make it sound like the thing is being analyzed by tektonics.org or something.
I really have no information about the " Geological Survey of Israel ".. Tell me why I should accept their assessment of an artifact without a second, third or other opinion. If the article is genuine, it can't possibly hurt.
I wouldn't for a moment suspect that you would grasp something like this so eagerly, just because it happens to add weight to your core belief system. Any more than you might suspect I would reject it for the same reason.
PotatoStew
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 78
wert said:
I was just saying to myself, "I bet wert will have something to say about this" ...where's my application for the million?I would still defend tektonics, where appropriate... however the point is that scientific analysis of an archaeological find is out of their realm of expertise. Now you will ask "What *is* their realm of expertise" or make some joke about how their realm of expertise is soliciting donations or something, and then I'll say their realm of expertise is researching and reporting the findings of scholars who are knowledgeable in the areas of debate that they cover, and then you'll say... well, whatever. All that is irrelevant to this thread.
Diogenes:
Well, that's something, isn't it? But yes, it would be nice to have a run down on both how the age was determined and how it is *usually* determined by archaeologists.
You're right of course... further opinions couldn't hurt, no matter if it's genuine or not. I didn't mean to imply that we shouldn't get further opinions... just giving you some good-natured ribbing.
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
UKDan said:
He's not the bloody messiah. He's just a very naughty boy.
PotatoStew
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 78
wert said:
Disparage Tektonics in one breath, Praise them in another.
No amount of rationalization makes it any less hypocritical.
Great rebuttal.
Butter is great on bread, but it sucks as a building material. Oops, I'm being hypocritical again.
PotatoStew
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 78
wert said:
Ok, let me try to walk you through this wert...
1) Tektonics doesn't do scientific analysis, hence it's not disparaging to imply that they shouldn't be doing it, it's just a recognition of the limits of their expertise.
2) Diogenes (the person I was talking to) would most likely suspect tektonics of having bias, because they are an apologist website, and he holds the opposing viewpoint. Hence, my using them in my statement is a recognition of the fact that Diogenes would probably suspect them of bias, not an assertion that I personally think they are biased. Hence, no disparagement, just a recognition of Diogenes' probable views on the site.
Anything outside of those two points is brought to the matter at hand by you not by me. If you thought I was implying something other than those two points, you were mistaken. It's ok. It happens.
If you insist on maintaining your claim that my statement was disparaging and hence hypocritical, then the onus is on you to actually demonstrate why my statement must be construed as disparaging, despite the explanation I just gave. Simply repeating "It's disparaging! You're hypocritical!" is nothing more than an unsupported claim.
In Praise of Python
Central Scrut
I loved your LOBrian reference.
I was watching "Meaning of Life" this weekend (for the 25th time).
Why don't people produce and market intellectual and funny films that poke fun at mainstream religion? MOLife and LOBrian are chalk-full of wonderful, arcane references.
I guess the same reason that we'll never elect a president whose an open atheist - the great unwashed find thinking too hard.
Central Scrut
I loved your LOBrian reference.
I was watching "Meaning of Life" this weekend (for the 25th time).
Why don't people produce and market intellectual and funny films that poke fun at mainstream religion? MOLife and LOBrian are chalk-full of wonderful, arcane references.
I guess the same reason that we'll never elect a president whose an open atheist - the great unwashed find thinking too hard.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Re: In Praise of Python
Don't forget Mel Brooks' ' History of the World '..
Gregor said:
Don't forget Mel Brooks' ' History of the World '..
stamenflicker
Unregistered
S
Headscratcher,
I just heard about this today-- somehow I missed it in your post yesterday. I think this is very interesting, and even though early indications seem to indicate it is authentic... I have my doubts. I agree with an earlier poster about the blatant lack of Christian artifacts. Humanity is almost too nostalgic to have not saved something...
The idea that this box was just milling around and no one noticed it seems suspect. But the inscription was in Aramaic, which may have made it difficult to read. A few people here were surprised to learn Jesus had a brother-- maybe that's what the guy meant when he said, "I thought Jesus was God's son and didn't have any brothers." Not meaning he believed in the Christian claims, just that it had never occurred to him that the bible would bother mentioning a brother, since it seemed so illogical. A lot of his intent could have been lost in translation, or like most media outlets, we only got the soundbyte.
Having evacuated my home last month due to a train derailment and a massive chemical spill here in Knoxville, I will say that when you have to evacuate, you aren't thinking much about your stuff. You are thinking mostly about your family and their safety. I can only imagine how incredible the evacuation of Jerusalem must have been in 70AD. I suspect folks just left stuff everywhere while the city burned. Who knows how many of these little trinkets were buried in the rubble. And its not like the Romans were going to let folks walk in and reclaim anything.
So I suppose it is possible. If it does prove to be authentic, then it seems a stretch to conclude that the box can't be included in the historical evidence-- I saw someone's odds above. It would be possible like the rich merchant analogy, but unlikely due to the inscription of the brother, which it seems is fairly unusual.
As far as your question regarding marriages and culture HS, I will reread them and post what I know. Off hand, I think it is unlikely that Jesus was married at the time of the 12 disciples. The fact that we don't know much about him prior to the age of 30 or so supports the notion that these 12 men around him wrote only what they knew of the guy, not supplementary material. I have seen more serious scholarship done on Jesus' missing years that involved submerging himself in the Essene culture and this seems more likely to me, both for Jesus and his cousin John. The language Jesus employs throughout the gospels is reminsent of some of the Dead Sea scroll stuff I've read.
Flick
I just heard about this today-- somehow I missed it in your post yesterday. I think this is very interesting, and even though early indications seem to indicate it is authentic... I have my doubts. I agree with an earlier poster about the blatant lack of Christian artifacts. Humanity is almost too nostalgic to have not saved something...
The idea that this box was just milling around and no one noticed it seems suspect. But the inscription was in Aramaic, which may have made it difficult to read. A few people here were surprised to learn Jesus had a brother-- maybe that's what the guy meant when he said, "I thought Jesus was God's son and didn't have any brothers." Not meaning he believed in the Christian claims, just that it had never occurred to him that the bible would bother mentioning a brother, since it seemed so illogical. A lot of his intent could have been lost in translation, or like most media outlets, we only got the soundbyte.
Having evacuated my home last month due to a train derailment and a massive chemical spill here in Knoxville, I will say that when you have to evacuate, you aren't thinking much about your stuff. You are thinking mostly about your family and their safety. I can only imagine how incredible the evacuation of Jerusalem must have been in 70AD. I suspect folks just left stuff everywhere while the city burned. Who knows how many of these little trinkets were buried in the rubble. And its not like the Romans were going to let folks walk in and reclaim anything.
So I suppose it is possible. If it does prove to be authentic, then it seems a stretch to conclude that the box can't be included in the historical evidence-- I saw someone's odds above. It would be possible like the rich merchant analogy, but unlikely due to the inscription of the brother, which it seems is fairly unusual.
As far as your question regarding marriages and culture HS, I will reread them and post what I know. Off hand, I think it is unlikely that Jesus was married at the time of the 12 disciples. The fact that we don't know much about him prior to the age of 30 or so supports the notion that these 12 men around him wrote only what they knew of the guy, not supplementary material. I have seen more serious scholarship done on Jesus' missing years that involved submerging himself in the Essene culture and this seems more likely to me, both for Jesus and his cousin John. The language Jesus employs throughout the gospels is reminsent of some of the Dead Sea scroll stuff I've read.
Flick
stamenflicker
Unregistered
S
Why don't people produce and market intellectual and funny films that poke fun at mainstream religion? MOLife and LOBrian are chalk-full of wonderful, arcane references.
I think the best religious humor out there now has to be the Simpsons. It's no LOB, but some of it cracks me up. I will say however that it is odd to find a decent Christian person portrayed in film these days. There have been a few, but they are just as hard to find as folks taking jabs.
Flick
I think the best religious humor out there now has to be the Simpsons. It's no LOB, but some of it cracks me up. I will say however that it is odd to find a decent Christian person portrayed in film these days. There have been a few, but they are just as hard to find as folks taking jabs.
Flick
Well, ya see...PotatoStew said:
You were the very first one to mention Tektonics in this thread. No one else saw fit to bring them into this discussion.
And IMHO, you did so in a disparaging way.
All else is pedantic rationalization and spin on your part.
I'm quite content to let our readers decide for themselves.
I even remember a few long time users of the forums expressing their dismay at your shameless kowtowing to JP *aka Robert Turkel*.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Thank you PS. I can see no flaws in the testing procedure. It seems likely to be a genuine biblical-age artifact, even if it is not of biblical significance.PotatoStew said:
Brown
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 12,984
Sad, but true, the business of religious artifacts is rife with fraud. At this point, I see no reason to believe that this artifact is any different. It is very likely that it is either a forgery or not what it others have claimed it to be.stamenflicker said:
It also reminds me of the much-hyped mini series from 1978 called "The Word," in which a fraudulent gospel was passed off as the real thing. And the supposed author of the the gospel? Why, none other than James, the brother of Jesus.
This kind of find raises the bar on the whole debate, I’m not saying we should stop talking about it but unless you read Aramaic or are a PHD in archeology all we can do is quote from articles out of magazines. And our banter is mote for lack of expertise.
I must admit this adds fuel to the theist flame, but my lack of knowledge may be hampering my judgment.
I wonder why they would not have written,” James brother of Jesus called Christ”.
I must admit this adds fuel to the theist flame, but my lack of knowledge may be hampering my judgment.
I wonder why they would not have written,” James brother of Jesus called Christ”.