-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
James Cameron has found Jesus' coffin...seriously
- Thread starter VinZuku
- Start date
- Status
catfish said:worst post I've ever read on GAF.
Not even close. Yeah, it was a troll, but Christians who don't believe in a literal resurrection are not at all uncommon.
As for Cameron's little project here, I'm all for something that would free humanity from the shackles of religion, but this is laughably ridiculous. I'm trying to stay objective about it, but it's hard to take this seriously from the guy who made Aliens Of The Deep.
Tim the Wiz
Banned
Shogmaster said:
Indeed. I don't understand how some are so quick to - and in fact want to - believe that the cycle of life and death is as cruel and unrelenting as it seems. The "fact" that we are constantly living at a rate one day closer to eternal nothingness isn't the most charming aspect of life. Otherwise, I've always kept an open mind to religion and to be honest, there have been times in my life where I've experienced things which have left me thinking that a spiritual plane of existence could really exist (I can see the "HUR HUR DRUGS?" replies now
) in the greater scheme of things.Tim the Wiz said:Indeed. I don't understand how some are so quick to - and in fact want to - believe that the cycle of life and death is as cruel and unrelenting as it seems. The "fact" that we are constantly living at a rate one day closer to eternal nothingness isn't the most charming aspect of life. Otherwise, I've always kept an open mind to religion and to be honest, there have been times in my life where I've experienced things which have left me thinking that a spiritual plane of existence could really exist (I can see the "HUR HUR DRUGS?" replies now
My problem with this reasoning is that is is too self-centered. Who says we're so important? Who says the universe owes us a nice, tidy, feel-good explaination? Who says it ows us an explaination period? Just because the concept of "finality" may seem cruel doesn't mean it isn't or can't be true.
none of this shit matters...if we could scientifically prove jesus never existed or jesus had kids, the believers still would never buy into it. Hell if aliens came down from space and told us they created earth and all of its inhabitants, I'm positive 90% of faith based people would still deny it.
~"Honey, come here quick! Someone found Jesus again. And this time I mean literally."
The BBC reported on this burial site 11 years ago. Welcome to last century Mr. Cameron.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254669,00.html
Is anyone actually reading this whole thread or are we all just typing what we think?
The BBC reported on this burial site 11 years ago. Welcome to last century Mr. Cameron.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254669,00.html
Is anyone actually reading this whole thread or are we all just typing what we think?
ElectricBlue187
Member
BocoDragon said:
:lol there must be
Dr. Ben Witherington has posted a response to this story on his blog:
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/
Pristine_Condition
Member
Boogie said:
"Game over, man....GAME OVER!"
Boogie said:
There's so many holes in that response that it's hilarious
1) He got numbers from his "friend", with no sourcing
4) He's using the Bible as an "historical source" :lol and makes no mention of any other sources.
5) He claims the "James, brother of Jesus" grave is real :lol
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
Hitokage said:
That's an ironic question to ask. Maybe she grew up under the rock that wasn't actually rolled away! In which case she'd know.
With that out of the way, the significance of the question of the resurrection to Christianity cannot be stressed enough. Even Paul admits that if Christ isn't raised from the dead then the whole of Christianity is useless to salvation (1 Cor. 15:17). So Cameron's claim, while it may or may not turn out to be accurate or even useful (I'm guessing it's a pretty weak argument since he's the one making it instead of, I don't know, a scholar), is still very important.
thefro said:
Yeah, data from a "friend" who has a Phd from Cambridge and is Professor of New Testament Studies could never be correct! :lol Your logic is mind-blowing. Accordingly, if I posted iPod sales figures on my blog and the source was my friend Steve Jobs, it must be flabby and in need of sourcing.
PhlegmMaster
Banned
thefro said:
Yeah, pretty much. The only point that might be a good objection is this:
Ben Witherington said:
I think he's right about mitochondrial DNA not revealing the genetic coding, I don't know if he's right that Cameron etc don't have access to nuclear DNA. Still, you have to wonder, what kind of "doctor" would misspell mitochrondrial?
Lucky Forward
Member
PhlegmMaster
Banned
I think the defensiveness shown by Christians in this thread speaks for itself. It says nothing about the veracity of Cameron's claim, of course, but it says a lot about how conscious they are that their belief is completely and utterly unsupported by evidence of any kind.
To show the difference, how do you think we atheists would have reacted if Cameron was making a documentary that claimed to provide solid historical evidence for Jesus and his various miracles? Most of us would be skeptical, but interested. Most importantly, I doubt there's any of us who would see this as a threat to our atheism, simply because the idea that the Judeo-Christian God exists is too implausible and, well, laughable, to even be considered without truly extraordinary evidence.
And yet here we have Christians foaming at the mouth and attacking every poster that even considers the (small) possibility that this might be true. Why would they be so aggressive if they were really confident that Jesus is the son of God?
To show the difference, how do you think we atheists would have reacted if Cameron was making a documentary that claimed to provide solid historical evidence for Jesus and his various miracles? Most of us would be skeptical, but interested. Most importantly, I doubt there's any of us who would see this as a threat to our atheism, simply because the idea that the Judeo-Christian God exists is too implausible and, well, laughable, to even be considered without truly extraordinary evidence.
And yet here we have Christians foaming at the mouth and attacking every poster that even considers the (small) possibility that this might be true. Why would they be so aggressive if they were really confident that Jesus is the son of God?
Only looking at the first page...PhlegmMaster said:
demon said:
I'M THE KING OF THE WORRRRLD! WOOOOOOOHAAA!
Teh Hamburglar said:
CabbageRed said:
Scullibundo said:
Scullibundo said:
SleazyC said:What if....
With the thread starting off so open and non-hostile...CowGirl said:
PhlegmMaster
Banned
140.85 said:
^^^^^^^^
Case in point.
Oldschoolgamer
The physical form of blasphemy
PhlegmMaster said:
Wow...in terms of "sides", the only people really catching feelings in this thread, aren't the "christian" ones. :lol
Wait...:lol Hold on a sec, are you really insinuating that the reaction would be any different than the christian's reactions?
:lol
Most people wouldn't give a shit, unless their was REAL evidence. Common sense and small bit of rationality would already have them dismiss this "documentary", simply because of the stupidity in the findings.
And who said this documentary was a threat to Christian beliefs? That is what you are implying right? That christians saw this thread and thought the world was going to collapse, and went in defense mode?
Most of the people claiming that this is fake as shit, brought some type of evidence(its really common sense). Please get the **** off of your high horse. Read the thread, a lot of the so called defensive remarks, were justified because of stupid shit like "superman and Goku". And before you even go there, I'm agnostic. Call me wishy washy or whatever, but, I LOL everytime I see an atheist attacking a christian, like they are better than them, and vice versa.
I'm doing it now.
:lol
PhlegmMaster
Banned
Gattsu, I'm pretty sure that at least some of the posters you've quoted are atheists.
Yup. Almost all religious believers hide a core of insecurity about their beliefs. Consequently, one of the common behaviors is to react defensively to even the tiniest "threat" to their beliefs.
Agnostics aren't wishy-washy, it's just that they've been indoctrinated into giving religious claims more respect than they deserve.
Oldschoolgamer said:
Yup. Almost all religious believers hide a core of insecurity about their beliefs. Consequently, one of the common behaviors is to react defensively to even the tiniest "threat" to their beliefs.
Agnostics aren't wishy-washy, it's just that they've been indoctrinated into giving religious claims more respect than they deserve.
Sorry if old...
Today's press conference (I think): http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/tomb.html?clik=www_wh_1 (Click on "Watch the Press Conference")
Today's press conference (I think): http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/tomb.html?clik=www_wh_1 (Click on "Watch the Press Conference")
PhlegmMaster
Banned
Gattsu25 said:
Oh, I see what you meant, now. No, I was refering to Christians who replied to serious posts about the OT, like 140.85.
Teh Pedobear
Banned
I think deep inside we all know Jesus was hittin on Mary
PhlegmMaster
Banned
SonnyBoy said:
Oh, I assure you I'm just as disrespectful of Islam as I am of Christianity. :lol
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
PhlegmMaster said:
That or how uncertain they are about the truth of their beliefs. Most Christians aren't schooled in apologetics, and many actually believe that faith must be blind in order to be faith. These don't question what they are told, and as a result are very uncertain about what they believe. This does not mean, however, that the whole religion is "completely and utterly unsupported by evidence of any kind," which is simply false. They may not support it intellectually with evidence, but the evidence is there for anyone who is looking.
PhlegmMaster said:
Now, here's a good point to consider. If a person believes that something is true, then why would another's claim at disproving that belief be taken as a serious threat to the belief? Of course, the thoughtful believer must be interested in any evidence which runs contrary to what he accepted as true, but his initial position would not be one of defensiveness; rather, it would be one of curiosity. Is this new evidence that he has not considered? Is it the removal of old evidence that he had based his beliefs on?
PhlegmMaster said:
On the other hand, when you tell a person that the foundational beliefs upon which he has lived his life are completely false, you can't honestly expect him to take to the news very well.
In the end, though, this discussion is a bit premature, since neither the presentation nor the documentary have been aired yet. All that can be done is speculate in abstract hypotheticals. Once the information is out will be a much better time to seriously discuss the merits or shortcomings of Cameron's claim.
Teh Pedobear
Banned
Maybe...just maybe, one of Jesus followers took the body to make people "believe" in a miracle? Im serious, you never know what would have happened.
And even if they find bones, tissues, whatever, how are they going to prove it belongs to jesus?
And even if they find bones, tissues, whatever, how are they going to prove it belongs to jesus?
It's always funny when the anti-religious people are furiously wanting to believe something that has no scientific support:
Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.
"They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.
...
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun."
Kloner also said the filmmakers' assertions are false.
"It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave," Kloner said. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time."
...
Most Christians believe Jesus' body spent three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City. The burial site identified in Cameron's documentary is in a southern Jerusalem neighborhood nowhere near the church.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/02/26/jesus.sburial.ap/index.html
--------------
Cameron could have made his "discovery" in Australia and the anti-religion zealots would be high-fiving. :lol
Seriously. Titanic.
Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.
"They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.
...
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun."
Kloner also said the filmmakers' assertions are false.
"It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave," Kloner said. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time."
...
Most Christians believe Jesus' body spent three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City. The burial site identified in Cameron's documentary is in a southern Jerusalem neighborhood nowhere near the church.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/02/26/jesus.sburial.ap/index.html
--------------
Cameron could have made his "discovery" in Australia and the anti-religion zealots would be high-fiving. :lol
Seriously. Titanic.
Of course, they can't prove it belongs to the Jesus. Just 'a Jesus' of the time. It's a claim based on probabilities (or improbabilities), not provable certainty.
In that sense, believing this to be true itself takes a little faith
Have they said if they've managed to identify the ages of the people when they died, or is that possible?
In that sense, believing this to be true itself takes a little faith
Have they said if they've managed to identify the ages of the people when they died, or is that possible?
- Status