FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Doesn't the Jesus family tomb show there was a Jesus, son of Joseph?
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-24-2007, 01:14 PM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Now in North Carolina
Posts: 184
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cege View Post
It does, though, seem possible to me that the missing ossuary from that particular tomb could be the same as the "James son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" ossuary so much in the news the past couple of years.
Except that the James ossuary is a forgery. Nice try though...
Bracer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 02:41 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bracer View Post
Except that the James ossuary is a forgery. Nice try though...
Do inform yourself.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 04:11 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 36078
Posts: 849
Default
I don't think the jury's in yet on the James ossuary's authenticity. My mind's still open, as I haven't as yet seen convincing proof of a forgery.

What is it that is so convincing to you, Bracer, that it's a forgery?
Cege is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 07:54 PM   #14
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Now in North Carolina
Posts: 184
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cege View Post
I don't think the jury's in yet on the James ossuary's authenticity. My mind's still open, as I haven't as yet seen convincing proof of a forgery.

What is it that is so convincing to you, Bracer, that it's a forgery?
Um, follow the link I provided, as it's pretty well laid out there. Alternately, you could just go to the BC&H FAQ, section 5.8, and read a few of the linked threads, as this has been hashed out pretty extensively on this forum already. The James ossuary is about as authentic as the Shroud of Turin.
Bracer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 08:48 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bracer View Post
Um, follow the link I provided, as it's pretty well laid out there. Alternately, you could just go to the BC&H FAQ, section 5.8, and read a few of the linked threads, as this has been hashed out pretty extensively on this forum already. The James ossuary is about as authentic as the Shroud of Turin.
The two are hardly the same. How do you handle the photograph they found dating to the 1970s and verified by experts?
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 09:00 PM   #16
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Now in North Carolina
Posts: 184
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
The two are hardly the same. How do you handle the photograph they found dating to the 1970s and verified by experts?
Haven't heard that one before. Citation please.
Bracer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 09:14 PM   #17
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Now in North Carolina
Posts: 184
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bracer View Post
Haven't heard that one before. Citation please.
Never mind. Seems they're arguing about it in the other thread. I think you've got your boxes mixed up, but let me take a minute or twenty and see what's going on...
Bracer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 09:23 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
No, you definitely don't have your boxes in the right order.

Greg Doudna asks Joe Zias himself why he's contradicting what he said earlier.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 09:59 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,307
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
The two are hardly the same. How do you handle the photograph they found dating to the 1970s and verified by experts?
Has that photograph been examined by experts who have not been paid by the defense team for the accused forger?

Stephen
S.C.Carlson is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 10:44 PM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson View Post
Has that photograph been examined by experts who have not been paid by the defense team for the accused forger?

Stephen
Not that I am aware of. I still think it's a forgery, but to conclude as Bracer here has done that the James Ossuary is as phony as the Shroud of Turin is far too extreme and unjustified.

I'm hoping we'll get another expert to look at it. The big question would be if the photograph is authentic is - why did Joe Zias say that he saw the ossuary in an antiquities store in the early 90s with only half the phrase, and if Golan didn't forge it, is it probable that someone else did?
Chris Weimer is offline  
 
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:22 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.