Evidence for God from Science

Silvertusk wrote:This one is making the rounds. What are your views on this?

http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Geo ... son-396262

Silvertusk wrote:This one is making the rounds. What are your views on this?

http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Geo ... son-396262

RickD wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:This one is making the rounds. What are your views on this?

http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Geo ... son-396262

It's either a fraud, just like every other attempt that has been made to prove that Jesus is not who he said he is, or it's true, and Christianity is the fraud.

Are you really worried about this Silvertusk?

Silvertusk wrote:

RickD wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:This one is making the rounds. What are your views on this?

http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Geo ... son-396262

It's either a fraud, just like every other attempt that has been made to prove that Jesus is not who he said he is, or it's true, and Christianity is the fraud.

Are you really worried about this Silvertusk?

No - but I need an apologetic answer to it. The way the article is written - it is as if they are "99%" certain that it is the tomb of Jesus based on the links between the James ossuary and the Talpott tomb. I wont to know how credible is their claim.

Silvertusk wrote:

RickD wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:This one is making the rounds. What are your views on this?

http://www.jpost.com/Christian-News/Geo ... son-396262

It's either a fraud, just like every other attempt that has been made to prove that Jesus is not who he said he is, or it's true, and Christianity is the fraud.

Are you really worried about this Silvertusk?

No - but I need an apologetic answer to it. The way the article is written - it is as if they are "99%" certain that it is the tomb of Jesus based on the links between the James ossuary and the Talpott tomb. I wont to know how credible is their claim.

Silvertusk wrote:Devils Advocate here -

What about the evidence that they claim that the ossuary containing the bones of "James, Brother of Jesus" contains the same material that was found in the tomb and this is why they are considering it further evidence of Jesus Tomb? Isn't this similar evidence that is used to prove the shrouds origin?

Good article by the way Rick. However it was written in light of when this tomb story first came out and not in light of this "new evidence"

Just to make it clear my intentions here - I run an apologetics home group and these are the sort of things that come up that I need absolute answers to for utter refutation.

Plus of course at any point when our faith comes under attack and we have truthful answers for it is always good in strengthening ones own faith.

Did you know that Yeshua - Jesus - was one of the more common names during that era? See Common Names in Israel 1-70 AD Link Here

...and also note that what the following verses mention:

Mat 28:12-15, "Then the priests met with the older Jewish leaders and made a plan. They paid the soldiers a lot of money 13 and said to them, "Tell the people that Jesus' followers came during the night and stole the body while you were sleeping. 14 If the governor hears about this, we will talk to him and keep you out of trouble." 15 So the soldiers kept the money and obeyed the priests. And that story is still spread among the Jews even today. " ERV

If what they found were true, then is it more evidence that supports Mat 28:12-15?

You see, people hate Jesus to this very day and seek to deny he ever existed - so I ask you why?

Why are you?

PaulSacramento wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:Devils Advocate here -

What about the evidence that they claim that the ossuary containing the bones of "James, Brother of Jesus" contains the same material that was found in the tomb and this is why they are considering it further evidence of Jesus Tomb? Isn't this similar evidence that is used to prove the shrouds origin?

Good article by the way Rick. However it was written in light of when this tomb story first came out and not in light of this "new evidence"

Just to make it clear my intentions here - I run an apologetics home group and these are the sort of things that come up that I need absolute answers to for utter refutation.

Plus of course at any point when our faith comes under attack and we have truthful answers for it is always good in strengthening ones own faith.

Does the ossuray contain the bones of "James the brother of Jesus"?
How on earth have they proven that?

Silvertusk wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:Devils Advocate here -

What about the evidence that they claim that the ossuary containing the bones of "James, Brother of Jesus" contains the same material that was found in the tomb and this is why they are considering it further evidence of Jesus Tomb? Isn't this similar evidence that is used to prove the shrouds origin?

Good article by the way Rick. However it was written in light of when this tomb story first came out and not in light of this "new evidence"

Just to make it clear my intentions here - I run an apologetics home group and these are the sort of things that come up that I need absolute answers to for utter refutation.

Plus of course at any point when our faith comes under attack and we have truthful answers for it is always good in strengthening ones own faith.

Does the ossuray contain the bones of "James the brother of Jesus"?
How on earth have they proven that?

Have you read the article?

PaulSacramento wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Silvertusk wrote:Devils Advocate here -

What about the evidence that they claim that the ossuary containing the bones of "James, Brother of Jesus" contains the same material that was found in the tomb and this is why they are considering it further evidence of Jesus Tomb? Isn't this similar evidence that is used to prove the shrouds origin?

Good article by the way Rick. However it was written in light of when this tomb story first came out and not in light of this "new evidence"

Just to make it clear my intentions here - I run an apologetics home group and these are the sort of things that come up that I need absolute answers to for utter refutation.

Plus of course at any point when our faith comes under attack and we have truthful answers for it is always good in strengthening ones own faith.

Does the ossuray contain the bones of "James the brother of Jesus"?
How on earth have they proven that?

Have you read the article?

Yes and there is lots of STATEMENTS but I don't see any evidence, much less proof, of anything.

See, what they have found is a tomb with an ossuary that has names that COULD be read as popular names of people that MAY have lived during the time of Jesus.

Now, how does that equate to being the VERY PEOPLE they say they are?

Look, lets be honest here:

The resurrection is THE EVENT that either makes or breaks Christianity.
There is no way around that.
Paul says as much.

There is a very vested interest for some people to prove that the resurrection never happened.

If it can be proven that Jesus never resurrected then ALL of Christianity is false.

And here is the thing:
To prove that they have to produce NOT a Tomb or an ossury, BUT a body.
A body with the evidence of having gone through a crucifixion, dated to first century AD, with enough proof that this particular body was also that of a person named Yeshua, that was from Nazareth, that was killed because he claimed to be the Messiah.

Nothing other than that can disprove the resurrection.

On February 26, 2007 a news conference was held at the New York Public Library by director James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici to discuss their documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus, which discusses the 1980 finding of the Talpiot Tomb, which they claim is in fact Jesus' family tomb. In the film, they also suggest that the so-called James ossuary is actually the "missing link" from the tomb (at the original discovery of the Talpiot Tomb, there were ten ossuaries, however one has since been lost—Jacobovici suggests the James Ossuary could be the tenth from Talpiot). According to the film, "recent tests conducted at the CSI Suffolk Crime lab in New York demonstrate that the patina (a chemical film encrustation on the box) from the James ossuary matches the patina from the other ossuaries in the Talpiot tomb."

Following the 4 March 2007 airing of The Lost Tomb of Jesus on the Discovery Channel, Ted Koppel aired a program entitled The Lost Tomb of Jesus: A Critical Look, whose guests included the director Simcha Jacobovici, James Tabor (a consultant and advisor on the docudrama), Johnathan Reed, Professor of Religion at the University of LaVerne and co-author of Excavating Jesus Beneath the Stones, Behind the Text, and William Dever, an archaeologist with 40 plus years experience in Middle Eastern archaeological digs.

The Washington Post in an article of 28 February 2007 quotes Dever as saying, "I just think it's a shame the way this story is being hyped and manipulated" and "all of the names [contained in the tomb] are common."[27] In fact, two of the names found in the tomb are unique among known ossuaries,[citation needed] and Jacobovici's argument does not in any case rely on the commonness or uncommonness of individual names, but on the statistical probability of finding a set of names in a single tomb.[citation needed]

Alan Cooperman, writer of the Washington Post article also states:
"Similar assessments came yesterday from two Israeli scholars, Amos Kloner, who originally excavated the tomb, and Joe Zias, former curator of archaeology at the Israeli Antiquities Authority. Kloner told the Jerusalem Post that the documentary is "nonsense." Zias described it in an e-mail to The Washington Post as a "hyped up film which is intellectually and scientifically dishonest."[27]

In the docudrama The Lost Tomb of Jesus, Simcha Jacobovici claims:

1.concerning the ossuary marked Jesus and the one believed to be that of Mary Magdalene: because "the DNA did not match, the forensic archaeologist concluded that they must be husband and wife";

2.that testing showed that there was a match between the patina on the James and Jesus ossuaries and refers to the James ossuary as a possible "missing link" from the tomb of Jesus;

3.and that an ossuary that became missing from the tomb of Jesus had actually been the infamous James ossuary.

During Ted Koppel's critique, The Lost Tomb of Jesus: A Critical Look, Koppel stated he had denials from three people Simcha Jacobovici had misquoted in the documentary.

1.Koppel had a written denial from the forensic archaeologist asserting that he had not concluded that the remains of Jesus and Miriamne showed they were husband and wife.

2.Koppel had a written denial from the Suffolk Crime Lab Director asserting that he had not stated the James ossuary patina "matched" that of the Jesus ossuary. Jacobovici had a written denial of Koppel's written denial saying that the term "match" had a legal meaning that could not be applied to the patina tests; however, the patinas corresponded closely enough to meet an evidentiary standard of admissibility.

3.Koppel had a verbal denial from Professor Amos Kloner, the archaeologist who had supervised the initial 1980 dig of the tomb of Jesus, with whom he spoke on 4 March 2007, asserting that the ossuary that later turned up missing from the tomb could not have been what is now known as the James ossuary because the ossuary he had seen and photographed and catalogued in 1980 had been totally unmarked, whereas the James ossuary is marked with the name of James and a rosette.

Additionally, Simcha Jacobovici's association of the ossuary with the 'Tomb of Jesus' seems to be excluded by the 1976 photograph of the ossuary presented at trial. The assertions of The Lost Tomb of Jesus are not supported by the overwhelming majority of scholars.