Jesus tomb found!!!

[malcd1]

I may not be the best person to comment on this subject (Being an atheist) but I am a touch sceptical of this story.

[cowdrill]

I am fairly postive there were things left out of the Bible on purpose.

yeah

like God is a lifelong Wanderers fan

[CAPSLOCK]

I am fairly postive there were things left out of the Bible on purpose.

yeah

like God is a lifelong Wanderers fan

Is she?

[TANGODANCER]

I am fairly postive there were things left out of the Bible on purpose.

yeah

like God is a lifelong Wanderers fan

Well, that's possibly more true than this latest "revelation" bringing the whole of Christendom crashing down overnight. They found these things twenty seven years ago but only now decide to believe them true because of a film producer? Someone wrote a novel once about getting Jesus's DNA from one of the nails he was crucified with. If there are as many of those as there are relics of the true cross in existence, the first would keep a scrap-metal dealer going for life and the second be the equivalent of Sherwood Forest. God is a profitable industry in commercial terms, as the predicted boom in Israeli real-estate well shows. Dream on.

[cowdrill]

yeah the whole thing is just one ridiculous publicity stunt

[TANGODANCER]

yeah the whole thing is just one ridiculous publicity stunt

Based on "I'll make sure my documentary gets a good audience in advance. The Vatican have already ordered the DVD"

[Montreal Wanderer]

Well, it wouldn't be surprising to find a two thousand year old tomb, even if the name Jesus was on it. It was not an uncommon name back then any more than it is in Mexico City. IIRC from my divinity teacher fifty years ago Barabus's name was actually Jesus Barabus (which might have confused those voting in Pilate's clemency hearing). So I'm not sure such a discovery would prove anything one way or another.

[bobo the clown]

... now, if you found one with Woderwick on it .....

"Welease Woderwick ... "

[TANGODANCER]

Well, it wouldn't be surprising to find a two thousand year old tomb, even if the name Jesus was on it. It was not an uncommon name back then any more than it is in Mexico City. IIRC from my divinity teacher fifty years ago Barabus's name was actually Jesus Barabus (which might have confused those voting in Pilate's clemency hearing). So I'm not sure such a discovery would prove anything one way or another.

The wonders of modern science, complete with a dogged determination to prove something or other, mainly other, can do no more than prove a tomb has been found that: A, possibly fits the time period of Jesus.

B Coincidentally, even though he was buried in secret, contains all his family, mother, father, supposed son and supposed wife, supposed brother and whoever else. He, being supposedly a man named Jesus.

Did the inscription say "Jesus of Nazareth"? Did the engraving just list names and no salutation to the Messiah? Rather strange don't you think that this man so revered by all his followers would get nothing more than a name on a list?

C: The tomb has a grand entrance and ornate carving upon its face; would it not have been in plain and public view at the time it was used, and was it opened several times or did they all die on the same day? A totally unprovable claim since Jsus's DNA came from where?

D: The DNA factor has already been raised. It could prove an unrelated man and woman were buried making no mention of the supposed fact that Mary Magdalene was his wife who bore him a son. Somewhat strange think ye not?

E: Is it likely that the apostles who claim to have seen him after his death were lying? Why would they do that? All the great Egyptian rulers were buried secretly, and all but one had inscriptions on their tombs identifying them to some degree. Did Jesus state anywhere the would do anything but say he would rise again from the dead after three days?

And the Turin Shroud, what is the truth of that and can any truth ever be proven or disproven? The answer is a firm "no" since the DNA factor arises again. The main consensus is that the shroud is a mid-fouteenth century one and was actually imprinted by Jaques de Moley, Grand Master of the Templars who was conveniently burned at the stake by the king of France. The de Molay version has strong claims as the shroud was unheard of until it surfaced in France, the home of the Templars. Either could be claimed as the truth but with no real evidence. Only man has ever made any of these claims, none are made as Godly hand-downs. Does it really matter where faith is concerned?

Science denies anything it can't prove, so where does that leave it all? Maybe a two thousand year-old hermit will be discoverd soon who will claim: "I was there". Till he does, the theories and revelations will continue evermore.

Amen.

[Montreal Wanderer]

The Templar version has an interesting twist. Jacques de Molay was actually nailed to a door but not killed. The "shroud" was allegedly used to bind his wounds and he recovered (therefore it was a dressing not a shroud). He wasn't burned at the stake until some seven years later.

[cowdrill]

... now, if you found one with Woderwick on it .....

"Welease Woderwick ... "

what? the wapist and wobber?!

[TANGODANCER]

The Templar version has an interesting twist. Jacques de Molay was actually nailed to a door but not killed. The "shroud" was allegedly used to bind his wounds and he recovered (therefore it was a dressing not a shroud). He wasn't burned at the stake until some seven years later.

This is a subject I have studied extensively:

Ironically, the two men who were responsible for his death, Phillipe, King of France and Pope Clement both died within a year of Molay's death. Rather chilling in its implication. Phillipe, being cash-strapped and jealous of the Templar's legendary riches, tried to get Clemence- under who's banner the Templars operated, to re-name them and make his son the chancellor of their wealth. When Clemence refused a list of trumped-up charges were drawn up incriminating the Templars as being in denial of the Christian faith and following obscene rituals and practises. Mass arrests followed and the Templars were shown the charges and tortured into confessions (all later refuted) . Molay, as said was burned seven years later, still denying the charges. Some of the Templar movement fled to Malta, Scotland and other locations with their "secret" and some of their wealth intact. That "secret" has remained undisclosed even till now.

ps: Friday, the thirteenth of October 1307, the day of the mass arrest of the Templars, is the origin of the "Friday the 13th" superstition.

[Montreal Wanderer]

The Templar version has an interesting twist. Jacques de Molay was actually nailed to a door but not killed. The "shroud" was allegedly used to bind his wounds and he recovered (therefore it was a dressing not a shroud). He wasn't burned at the stake until some seven years later.

This is a subject I have studied extensively:

Ironically, the two men who were responsible for his death, Phillipe, King of France and Pope Clement both died within a year of Molay's death. Rather chilling in its implication. Phillipe, being cash-strapped and jealous of the Templar's legendary riches, tried to get Clemence- under who's banner the Templars operated, to re-name them and make his son the chancellor of their wealth. When Clemence refused a list of trumped-up charges were drawn up incriminating the Templars as being in denial of the Christian faith and following obscene rituals and practises. Mass arrests followed and the Templars were shown the charges and tortured into confessions (all later refuted) . Molay, as said was burned seven years later, still denying the charges. Some of the Templar movement fled to Malta, Scotland and other locations with their "secret" and some of their wealth intact. That "secret" has remained undisclosed even till now.

There's a lot of forgotten loot buried around the world and, the Da Vinci Code nothwithstanding, I doubt anyone knows where it is. Some may be found when renovating the town centre!