jesus tomb found????

[elite_hunter_sh3]

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh: ??????

jesus tomb found??? wow

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3368731,00.html

[Torplexed]

Either that or James Cameron's career has become hopelessly lost. :shifty:

[bookworm_020]

What a bunch of hot air. The coffins were found over 15 years ago and all creditable scholars say that that the names used were common for there time. Even the bile points that out as the prisioner released instead of Jesus when he was on trial (at the crowd's and high priests request) was a guy called Jesus Barabbas!

There is also a mention of another man called Jesus in the Bible.

I think James Cameron is getting a little wacky....:hmm:

[Syxx_Killer]

I liked the images James Cameron brought back from his Titanic expeditions. Now I think he just lost it, personally.

[Boris]

Cool if it were true though. Jesus son of joseph is a little more specific though, and together with the two Marys, a strange coincidence? Provided they got the translations right that is.

[waste gate]

This is the same man who have brought us reality in the form of the following documentaries:

Aliens, The Terminator, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, True Lies, Titanic, T2 3-D: Battle Across Time, Escape from New York. All based on fact.

[geetrue]

Believe half of what you hear, part of what you see and everything the Lord thy God leads you to believe.

No way Jose' did they find my Lord ...
Jesus sit's in heaven at the right hand side of God and by
the power of the Holy Spirit He lives in the heart of every believer.

My link: http://www.amazingbible.org/

[Torplexed]

Seems like Cameron's career has been headed for the Abyss ever since Titantic. I wonder if having former wife and actress Linda Hamilton dump him for another woman had something to do with it. I've enjoyed most of his movies, but I hear he's something of a egomaniac and difficult to deal with.

[AJ!]

If they found the cave and remains over 30 years ago, this would have been global news.... to actualy find the remains of jesus would bring more then one documentary. Also wouldnt every christian be outraged that these sacred holy artifacts are being put on display and not left where they are?? :-?

[THE_MASK]

OMG , Jesus tomb found . ;) Did they find it on the moon ?

[GSpector]

I was not aware His body was ever recovered after the rising, to put in a casket :hmm:

[Torplexed]

OMG , Jesus tomb found . ;) Did they find it on the moon ?

Don't you know that whole moon landing thing was a hoax? ;);)

[AVGWarhawk]

This has been sensationalized for TV. Still interesting at any rate. I will watch with an open mind. The evidence will have to be very substantial:know:

[Oberon]

How the heck do you get DNA evidence on Jesus? Was Pilate the founder of the DNA archive or something?

[The Avon Lady]

How the heck do you get DNA evidence on Jesus? Was Pilate the founder of the DNA archive or something?
The DNA is being used to attempt to show the interelationship of those burried in the cave, nothing else.

[Fish]

It makes a great story for a TV film. But it's completely impossible. It's nonsense. There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb. They were a Galilee family with no ties in Jerusalem. The Talpiot tomb belonged to a middle class family from the 1st century CE.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1171894527185&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[SUBMAN1]

Either that or James Cameron's career has become hopelessly lost. :shifty:

I opt for hopelessly lost. What BS.

-S

[bradclark1]

Bummer. I guess we in the U.S. won't be able to watch it. I think it would be an interesting show regardless.

Edit: Comes on Sunday at 9pm.

[The Avon Lady]

It makes a great story for a TV film. But it's completely impossible. It's nonsense. There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb. They were a Galilee family with no ties in Jerusalem.
That might be slightly tied to the question of where was Jesus born (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22where+was+jesus+born%3F%22)?

[AJ!]

Next thing they will be putting jesus's skeleton on ebay :rotfl::rotfl:

[STEED]

What bunk. :yep:

[Sailor Steve]

Cool if it were true though. Jesus son of joseph is a little more specific though, and together with the two Marys, a strange coincidence? Provided they got the translations right that is.
Cool except that the whole of Christianity is based on the concept that Jesus rose from the dead, and consequently could NOT be in any tomb anywhere.

As was already pointed out, Jesus was a common name at the time, being the Greek interpretation of the Hebrew name we commonly translate as Joshua.

[The Avon Lady]

As was already pointed out, Jesus was a common name at the time, being the Greek interpretation of the Hebrew name we commonly translate as Joshua.
No. Joshua is Yehoshua in Hebrew. Jesus is Yeishu in Hebrew. Not the same names.

[geetrue]

His real name is Jehovah

St John 17:11 Jesus said, "I will remain in this world no longer, Father I am coming home to you",
"Protect them with the power of your name ... the name that you gave me"


Je•ho•vah\j noun[NL, reading (as YÉhÖwÀh) of Heb yhwh Yahweh with the vowel points of 'adhÖnÀy my lord](1530)
: god 1

[AVGWarhawk]

Next thing they will be putting jesus's skeleton on ebay :rotfl::rotfl:


I have a piece of French toast with the image of The Virgin Mary on it. Going up for bid!!!

[The Avon Lady]

His real name is Jehovah

St John 17:11 Jesus said, "I will remain in this world no longer, Father I am coming home to you",
"Protect them with the power of your name ... the name that you gave me"
Yet not once is he refered to as such in the NT. Hmmmmmmmm.........

Anyway, from what I'm seeing, the KJV text for this verse is:

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

Even according to Jesus, the biblical names of G-d are not one and the same as his. "Those whom thou hast given me" are the apostles, from the Christian commentaries I'm reading.

But no matter.

[geetrue]

His real name is Jehovah

St John 17:11 Jesus said, "I will remain in this world no longer, Father I am coming home to you",
"Protect them with the power of your name ... the name that you gave me"
Yet not once is he refered to as such in the NT. Hmmmmmmmm.........

Anyway, from what I'm seeing, the KJV text for this verse is:

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

Even according to Jesus, the biblical names of G-d are not one and the same as his. "Those whom thou hast given me" are the apostles, from the Christian commentaries I'm reading.

But no matter.

I forgive you Avon Lady for not having access to the NIV version of which I have quoted from ... The name Jehovah is also known as Jah meaning God and the scribes that hand wrote the old testament had to stop and go wash their hands before they could continue writing in the manuscripts of their day.

Jehovah also means my Lord and I thank the Lord thy God for making Himself available to all mankind through the blessed appearance of His Son our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

Jesus is my Lord, He is Lord of all I am, He is Lord of all I will ever be ... :p

[kiwi_2005]

Jesus was born in a BARN surrounded by sheep. Therefore he has close links with kiwi's :smug:

;);)

[The Avon Lady]

His real name is Jehovah

St John 17:11 Jesus said, "I will remain in this world no longer, Father I am coming home to you",
"Protect them with the power of your name ... the name that you gave me"
Yet not once is he refered to as such in the NT. Hmmmmmmmm.........

Anyway, from what I'm seeing, the KJV text for this verse is:

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

Even according to Jesus, the biblical names of G-d are not one and the same as his. "Those whom thou hast given me" are the apostles, from the Christian commentaries I'm reading.

But no matter.

I forgive you Avon Lady for not having access to the NIV version of which I have quoted from ... The name Jehovah is also known as Jah meaning God and the scribes that hand wrote the old testament had to stop and go wash their hands before they could continue writing in the manuscripts of their day.

Jehovah also means my Lord and I thank the Lord thy God for making Himself available to all mankind through the blessed appearance of His Son our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

Jesus is my Lord, He is Lord of all I am, He is Lord of all I will ever be ... :p
Expected. A symptom of supersessionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism).

No matter.

[Winston]

Next thing they will be putting jesus's skeleton on ebay :rotfl::rotfl:

No no, Just small peaces of it. A few thousand knuckle bones and fingers. The odd spare rib.

[Torplexed]

I'm waiting for someone to clone the DNA from the remains.....and then claim it's the Second Coming. :o

[Sailor Steve]

As was already pointed out, Jesus was a common name at the time, being the Greek interpretation of the Hebrew name we commonly translate as Joshua.
No. Joshua is Yehoshua in Hebrew. Jesus is Yeishu in Hebrew. Not the same names.
So, how come I can't find any Yeishus in the Torah?

Expected. A symptom of supersessionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism).

No matter.
Thanks for that link. I know the belief, but was unaware of the name. It's one of the reasons for my lessened faith these days: the idea that if I'm right, everyone else HAS to be wrong. It's what drives militant Muslims, and also dedicated Christians. It also is what leads to holy wars.

[The Avon Lady]

As was already pointed out, Jesus was a common name at the time, being the Greek interpretation of the Hebrew name we commonly translate as Joshua.
No. Joshua is Yehoshua in Hebrew. Jesus is Yeishu in Hebrew. Not the same names.
So, how come I can't find any Yeishus in the Torah?
Tons of Hebrew names are not mentioned in the Torah.

[Sailor Steve]

Oh, sure; another cherished belief dashed on the rocks.:rotfl:

[SUBMAN1]

His real name is Jehovah

St John 17:11 Jesus said, "I will remain in this world no longer, Father I am coming home to you",
"Protect them with the power of your name ... the name that you gave me" Yet not once is he refered to as such in the NT. Hmmmmmmmm.........

Anyway, from what I'm seeing, the KJV text for this verse is:

"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

Even according to Jesus, the biblical names of G-d are not one and the same as his. "Those whom thou hast given me" are the apostles, from the Christian commentaries I'm reading.

But no matter.
I forgive you Avon Lady for not having access to the NIV version of which I have quoted from ... The name Jehovah is also known as Jah meaning God and the scribes that hand wrote the old testament had to stop and go wash their hands before they could continue writing in the manuscripts of their day.

Jehovah also means my Lord and I thank the Lord thy God for making Himself available to all mankind through the blessed appearance of His Son our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

Jesus is my Lord, He is Lord of all I am, He is Lord of all I will ever be ... :p

Great. ANother translation to futher water down the original text. Why do people keep on insisting that more and more translations be made? Every time, they put in more and more of modern day thinking in a historical text and its annoying.

-S

[The Avon Lady]

Expected. A symptom of supersessionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism).

No matter.
Thanks for that link. I know the belief, but was unaware of the name. It's one of the reasons for my lessened faith these days: the idea that if I'm right, everyone else HAS to be wrong. It's what drives militant Muslims, and also dedicated Christians. It also is what leads to holy wars.
Not so fast!

There is nothing wrong with the actual claim that if someone's right, other arguments can be absolutely wrong. It happens all the time.

My point to Geetrue was in response to his informing me of the meanings of the Tetragrammaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton), which we Jews have been reciting numerous times a day in their prayers, benedictions and studies from times way before Christianity was concocted.

"I'm right and you're wrong" on its own does not usually lead to "holy wars". Israel's holy wars were G-d's instructions to the Israelites to capture the land of Canaan. Christianity's holy wars (if you so wish to call the Crusades) were a response to the Islamic Jihad campaigns that had conquered Christian lands throught the Mideast, Europe and Asia. Islamic holy wars are part of Islam's commandment to its adherents that the entire world must be conquered and/or subjugated by Islam in one way or another.

So in the case of Christianity, I really don't think there are any scripture based commandments to wage any sort of holy war. The Crusades started off as a defensive countermeasure. The Christian "holy wars" which resulted afterwards may in many ways have actually been ironically influenced by Islam's Jihad against humanity.

Judaism's holy wars are limited to the conquest of the Land of Israel some 3000 years ago, as well as any defensive war. It is always holy to defend one's self, religion aside.

Islam's holy wars are against all infidels in all lands and at all times.

So rethink your beliefs but whatever you do, please do not fall for Islam. Thanks in advance. ;)

[The Avon Lady]

Great. ANother translation to futher water down the original text. Why do people keep on insisting that more and more translations be made? Every time, they put in more and more of modern day thinking in a historical text and its annoying.
You should dig up the earliest NT manuscripts and see how many things have changed. And then ask yourself why.

Anyone want to tunnel their way into the Vatican vaults with me? :|\\

[SUBMAN1]

Great. ANother translation to futher water down the original text. Why do people keep on insisting that more and more translations be made? Every time, they put in more and more of modern day thinking in a historical text and its annoying. You should dig up the earliest NT manuscripts and see how many things have changed. And then ask yourself why.

Anyone want to tunnel their way into the Vatican vaults with me? :|\\
The task you are asking of us is one that is both impossible and insurmountable for it would take a lifetime.

[moose1am]

"THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!"

CHIP WILSON


Expected. A symptom of supersessionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism).

No matter.
Thanks for that link. I know the belief, but was unaware of the name. It's one of the reasons for my lessened faith these days: the idea that if I'm right, everyone else HAS to be wrong. It's what drives militant Muslims, and also dedicated Christians. It also is what leads to holy wars.
Not so fast!

There is nothing wrong with the actual claim that if someone's right, other arguments can be absolutely wrong. It happens all the time.

My point to Geetrue was in response to his informing me of the meanings of the Tetragrammaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton), which we Jews have been reciting numerous times a day in their prayers, benedictions and studies from times way before Christianity was concocted.

"I'm right and you're wrong" on its own does not usually lead to "holy wars". Israel's holy wars were G-d's instructions to the Israelites to capture the land of Canaan. Christianity's holy wars (if you so wish to call the Crusades) were a response to the Islamic Jihad campaigns that had conquered Christian lands throught the Mideast, Europe and Asia. Islamic holy wars are part of Islam's commandment to its adherents that the entire world must be conquered and/or subjugated by Islam in one way or another.

So in the case of Christianity, I really don't think there are any scripture based commandments to wage any sort of holy war. The Crusades started off as a defensive countermeasure. The Christian "holy wars" which resulted afterwards may in many ways have actually been ironically influenced by Islam's Jihad against humanity.

Judaism's holy wars are limited to the conquest of the Land of Israel some 3000 years ago, as well as any defensive war. It is always holy to defend one's self, religion aside.

Islam's holy wars are against all infidels in all lands and at all times.

So rethink your beliefs but whatever you do, please do not fall for Islam. Thanks in advance. ;)

[The Avon Lady]

"THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!"

CHIP WILSON
That's Flip - not Chip. :yep:

And the Devil did make me buy this dress. :rotfl:

[The Avon Lady]

Anyone want to tunnel their way into the Vatican vaults with me? :|\\
The task you are asking of us is one that is both impossible and insurmountable for it would take a lifetime.
Party pooper! :oops:

[The Avon Lady]

I forgive you Avon Lady for not having access to the NIV version of which I have quoted from ... The name Jehovah is also known as Jah meaning God and the scribes that hand wrote the old testament had to stop and go wash their hands before they could continue writing in the manuscripts of their day.

Jehovah also means my Lord and I thank the Lord thy God for making Himself available to all mankind through the blessed appearance of His Son our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

Jesus is my Lord, He is Lord of all I am, He is Lord of all I will ever be ... :p
Expected. A symptom of supersessionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism).

No matter.
Even more so on this particular matter:

Jewish relevance of the word YHWH to the (I Am) in the New Testament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton#Jewish_relevance_of_the_word_YHWH_t o_the_.28I_Am.29_in_the_New_Testament):

The New Testament does not use the Tetragrammaton. The two Greek words that are consistently used to speak in reference to God are κυριος (‘lord,’ ‘master’) and θεος (‘God’). However, in the past, some scholars endeavored to make a connection between Jesus’ use of the first person singular personal pronoun εγω in conjunction with the first person singular form of ειμι (‘to be’) as an allusion to the tetragrammaton. Today, few scholars would say that there is a connection between the “I am” and the divine name. Edwin Freed explains, “the meaning of the sentence in the mind of the writer was: 'Before Abraham was, I, the Christ, the Son of God, existed.” William Loader notes that the “text need mean no more than I am and was in existence before Abraham, still a majestic unique claim but not an allusion to the divine name.” The Simple English Bible translates it as, “I am the Messiah.” K.L. McKay notes, “The emphatic words used by Jesus in the passages referred to above [including John 8:58] are perfectly natural in their contexts, and they do not echo the words of Exodus 3:14 in the normally quoted Greek version.” John 9:9 is but one example that Margaret Davies uses to show that it “allow[s] the speaker to identify himself ... thus the man born blind identifies himself as the man born blind.”