Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?

[Gary Sheldrake]

You need to understand that in 1st century Palestine religion and politics were not the separate things that they are in the modern world (if they are separate in the modern world). When Jesus (or anyone else for that matter) talked about "the Kingdom of God" this is a political concept. Kingdoms are about politics. The coming of the Kingdom of God meant ousting the Roman occupation of Palestine. That would have been seen as sedition.

Exactly. You are spot on. Jesus made the proclamation that he was the King of Israel when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey. This was a direct comparison of himself to King Solomon (from Zechariah in the Old testament) who rode into Jerusalem on a donkey for his coronation. Having palms thrown at his feet, he was making a direct reference to Maccabees in the Old Testament, wherein palm branches were used in celebration of the liberation of Jerusalem. Every Jew who saw the spectacle of Jesus riding in on Palm Sunday knew exactly what Jesus was saying when he did these things, and it didn't escape the attention of the Romans, who also knew what it meant. It was a direct challenge to the rule Rome. He was proclaiming himself the King of the Jews, which was Herod's title, bestowed on him by Rome. And claiming the title of King of the Jews, he was in fact claiming himself to be the Messiah, and one of the primary attributes of the Messiah was to liberate Israel and claim the Temple for the Jews. The Romans owned Jerusalem and the temple and everything in it, right down to the vestments worn by the High Priest (Caiaphas). They allowed the Jews to live in Jerusalem and use the Temple. But the entire region belonged to Rome. Jesus' actions on Palm Sunday were an unmistakable challenge to the rule of Rome. Jesus was executed five days later. For Sedition. If he was a simple holy man preaching a message of peace and love, the Romans wouldn't have noticed him.

You are absolutely right. Religion and politics were the same venue in those times.

All the best,
Gary

 

[leibowde84]

Gary, you should also know that going outside the church for your facts allows Satan the golden opportunity to deceive you. I do believe that is exactly what has happened to you. I do hope you are led to the truth and will pray for you. I am very sorry to hear that you have been led astray. Anyway it was good talking with you and I do hope for the best for you.

Wow ... You don't see the clear and extremely dangerous circular logic inherent in your comment? This is truly disturbing.

 

[First Baseman]

Wow ... You don't see the clear and extremely dangerous circular logic inherent in your comment? This is truly disturbing.

It is only circular to those who do not believe the Bible - God's word - is truth.

This isnt circular:
God - Bible - us

This is circular:
Bible - us - Bible

 

[Ouroboros]

Irrelevant inquiry leads to irrelevant response.

Irrelevant questions leads to irrelevant responses as well.

Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth? Irrelevant question.

 

[First Baseman]

Irrelevant questions leads to irrelevant responses as well.

Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth? Irrelevant question.

Nevertheless that is the thread topic. If it is irrelevant to you why respond to it?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

His bones were found in this tomb near Jerusalem in 1980:

Lol.

I don't joke about things like this. And it's likely that the tomb of Joseph of Arimethia is located adjacent to this. They explored his tomb with a robotic camera. And Jesus' tomb (pictured above) with a symbolic spirit of a dove descending over the head (circle) of Jesus was reburied and covered with this slab:

Israel doesn't want to get in the middle of any of this.

 

[Gary Sheldrake]

It is only circular to those who do not believe the Bible - God's word - is truth.

This isnt circular:
God - Bible - us

This is circular:
Bible - us - Bible

Good Morning First Baseman. You say that the Bible Is God's word. That is reaffirmed after the readings during the mass, when the reader says "the word of the Lord" and the congregation says "thanks be to God." The institutions who ask us to participate in these affirmations have a vested interest in reinforcing this notion, which is why they do it. Of course, we know that God didn't pen the Bible - people did. And while some will say the people who wrote it were inspired by God or guided by the Holy Spirit, the errors and mismatches between one gospel and the next with regard to the same events is proof that either the Bible is not inspired by anything divine or that even divine guidance is flawed.

All the best,
Gary

 

[First Baseman]

Good Morning First Baseman. You say that the Bible Is God's word. That is reaffirmed after the readings during the mass, when the reader says "the word of the Lord" and the congregation says "thanks be to God." The institutions who ask us to participate in these affirmations have a vested interest in reinforcing this notion, which is why they do it. Of course, we know that God didn't pen the Bible - people did. And while some will say the people who wrote it were inspired by God or guided by the Holy Spirit, the errors and mismatches between one gospel and the next with regard to the same events is proof that either the Bible is not inspired by anything divine or that even divine guidance is flawed.

All the best,
Gary

Once again I think you have been deceived. There are no errors or mismatches, just different people telling the story the way they saw it. The Holy Spirit helps them remember it precisely but it is still told through their eyes and people see things differently.

Police know that when people tell a story exactly the same way it means they collaborated. However, when people tell the same story with slight deviations police know they are most likely telling the truth. I was a police officer years ago so I know this to be fact.

Had they all told the story exactly the same way the same critics you are listening to now would just say that they had copied one another.

And again I have to think that you were just looking for a reason not to believe it before you started. Satan will give you at least one reason every time you doubt God's word. You should know that already, though.

Best wishes to you,
The humble first baseman (retired )

 

[jonathan180iq]

For virtually everybody in antiquity, our manuscripts date from after ~1000 CE. And we have maybe half a dozen. As for when the autographs (the "originals") were written, usually there is anywhere from a 100 to 500 years separation between the "biographies" of ancient persons like Jesus, Pythagoras, Apollonius of Tyana, Euripides, Alexander the Great, etc. (still less for the famous biographers themselves! We don't know who the gospel authors were, when the great biographer Diogenes Laertius wrote, and there are countless historical works that start with English titles like "Pseud-" because they weren't written anonymously like the gospels and then later attributed to persons but written like the forged epistles in the NT (claimed by the author to be written by persons they weren't).

To get a quick and simple sense of the value of NT evidence, consider that the gospels are some of the few and are perhaps most important sources for Pontius Pilate, the NT is an invaluable and central source for the practice and nature of the Pharisees and 2nd-temple Judaism more generally, textual critical methods used in classics, Near-Eastern studies, medieval studies, and elsewhere can be tested using our NT sources because there is no text from antiquity or even the medieval period that has as much textual attestation as do any of the NT books. I'm eagerly waiting for the official publication of a new scrap of Mark found in mummy wrapping that is supposed to date from the 1st century. Currently, p52 is the earliest NT manuscript attestation we have, and it is unbelievably close to the time of composition (it's a scrap of John that dates from the first half of the 2nd century CE). To have a scrap from the century written would be mind-blowing.

Like most of my areas of study, NT studies and historical Jesus studies are a hobby. But as an undergrad one of my actual majors was classical languages. Which meant that I had to read Greek texts which included, at the bottom of each age, something called a "critical apparatus" that the editor uses to inform you what the variants are among the manuscripts used to produce the edition. So I was used to critical apparati that listed 5 or 6 variants at most because that's how many manuscripts were available to the editor to construct Caesar's The Gallic Wars, Plato's The Republic, Plutarch or Livy's biographies/"lives", etc. The critical apparatus to the UBS Greek NT? Not only does it have to ignore all but a comparatively tiny number of manuscripts, but there are so many manuscripts that are important Metzger (one of the great textual critics of the 20th century) wrote an entire textual commentary to accompany the critical apparatus.

Most authors from antiquity survive in one or two manuscripts of texts in which something these authors wrote was quoted in.

Yes - but surely you admit that there is a difference between historical value and historical accuracy, right?

Even if there were 5,000 pages worth of verifiable autographs, the speaker of each would still be admittedly biased and presenting only their personal interpretation of certain events. This is as true today as it is for 2,000 years old documents, as I'm sure we'd all agree. We shouldn't immediately value claims without external, independent, corroborating evidence.

It's not the historical value of the New Testament that I question - it's the accuracy of events which are given a weight in those documents that is curiously missing from other historical records.

 

[paarsurrey]

It is only circular to those who do not believe the Bible - God's word - is truth.

This isnt circular:
God - Bible - us

This is circular:
Bible - us - Bible

As against it what would be circular argument that Atheists present?
Regards

 

[Ouroboros]

Nevertheless that is the thread topic. If it is irrelevant to you why respond to it?

As a comparison, you must realize that knowing or not knowing where the remains are of any historical or fictional person doesn't change the relevance or validity of his or her story. Asking where the remains of Jesus of Nazareth are is akin to asking where the remains of Lazarus are. Whatever the answer is to one is the answer to the other.

 

[First Baseman]

As a comparison, you must realize that knowing or not knowing where the remains are of any historical or fictional person doesn't change the relevance or validity of his or her story. Asking where the remains of Jesus of Nazareth are is akin to asking where the remains of Lazarus are. Whatever the answer is to one is the answer to the other.

Sir, that is quite stupid and wrong. Please don't elaborate, you'll only make this post look more stupid.

 

[First Baseman]

As against it what would be circular argument that Atheists present?
Regards

The argument they present may or may not be circular. I couldn't care less which one. I am convinced they are wrong.

 

[Ouroboros]

Sir, that is quite stupid and wrong. Please don't elaborate, you'll only make this post look more stupid.

Buddy, you're going on my ignore. Buh bye! *waves*

 

[First Baseman]

Buddy, you're going on my ignore. Buh bye! *waves*

Good. And good-bye to you. Hopefully you won't respond to anymore of my threads with such stupidity.

 

[fantome profane]

Police know that when people tell a story exactly the same way it means they collaborated. However, when people tell the same story with slight deviations police know they are most likely telling the truth. I was a police officer years ago so I know this to be fact.

Had they all told the story exactly the same way the same critics you are listening to now would just say that they had copied one another.

This is a good point. We can tell that people have copied their story not only when they get the details exactly the same but when the use the exact same words to tell the story. When they use the exact same words and phrases, paragraphs etc you can tell that the work has been copied. Just like Police Officers can tell when this is going on so can textual critics who study ancient documents like the Bible. And this is why virtually all scholars who study the Bible (even the most conservative) agree that large parts of the Gospel of Mathew and the Gospel of Luke were just copied directly from the Gospel of Mark.

 

[First Baseman]

This is a good point. We can tell that people have copied their story not only when they get the details exactly the same but when the use the exact same words to tell the story. When they use the exact same words and phrases, paragraphs etc you can tell that the work has been copied. Just like Police Officers can tell when this is going on so can textual critics who study ancient documents like the Bible. And this is why virtually all scholars who study the Bible (even the most conservative) agree that large parts of the Gospel of Mathew and the Gospel of Luke were just copied directly from the Gospel of Mark.

Funny, I've never read that before. My guess is that you are getting your information from those biased against the Church.

Can you prove that "large parts of the Gospel of Mathew and the Gospel of Luke were just copied directly from the Gospel of Mark"? Or is this merely speculation?

 

[viole]

Gary, you should also know that going outside the church for your facts allows Satan the golden opportunity to deceive you. I do believe that is exactly what has happened to you. I do hope you are led to the truth and will pray for you. I am very sorry to hear that you have been led astray. Anyway it was good talking with you and I do hope for the best for you.

Question. If Satan is such an effective deceiver, how do you know you have not been deceived by him?

I cannot help but notice some attitude differences between the God who wipes out the whole world, killing women and children, and the meek God that forgives everyone by, basically, "killing" himself.

Are you sure that Jesus is not the ultimate Satan deception?

Ciao

- viole

 

[First Baseman]

Question. If Satan is such an effective deceiver, how do you know you have not been deceived by him?

I cannot help but notice some attitude differences between the God who wipes out the whole world, killing women and children, and the meek God that forgives everyone by, basically, "killing" himself.

Are you sure that Jesus is not the ultimate Satan deception?

Ciao

- viole

Are you sure that you are not too much of a smart alec to carry on a conversation about this reasonably?

 

[viole]

Are you sure that you are not too much of a smart alec to carry on a conversation about this reasonably?

Well, that was a honest question. I am not sure your reply is an answer.

Ciao

- viole

P.s. What is a smart alec?