FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-22-2003, 03:53 PM   #1
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default Witherington believes God uses antiquities to bring humanity closer to Biblical truth



I would almost prefer that this be a joke, but it was on a news site.

The Shanks-Witherington Book Tour

Quote:
Currently, Hershel Shanks, editor of "Biblical Archeology Review" and co-author, with Witherington, of "The Brother of Jesus," is requesting the bone fragments from the antiquities collector in Jerusalem who owned the ossuary.

If the bones are released, mitochondrial DNA samples will be extracted and tested against the DNA found on the Shroud of Turin.

Matching mitochondrial DNA will show that the Shroud was the burial cloth of Jesus and that James and Jesus were brothers.
Toto is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 04:18 PM   #2
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy
Posts: 12,048
Default

And what does this have to do with Cold Fusion?
Autonemesis is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 04:23 PM   #3
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Autonemesis
And what does this have to do with Cold Fusion?
Beats me. Grand theory of pseudoscience?

Will anyone take this ossuary seriously after reading this?
Toto is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 05:07 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,635
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Toto
Will anyone take this ossuary seriously after reading this?
What exactly does this have to do with the authenticity of the ossuary?
Layman is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 05:15 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orions Belt
Posts: 3,911
Default Re: Witherington believes God uses antiquities to bring humanity closer to Biblical truth

Quote:
Originally posted by Toto


I would almost prefer that this be a joke, but it was on a news site.

The Shanks-Witherington Book Tour
Wrong, it would only show that the two were brothers, and that the two artifacts were faked by the same con artist....
Kosh is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 05:46 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Layman
What exactly does this have to do with the authenticity of the ossuary?
It has to do with the credibility of the people promoting it.

Unless you want to argue that Shanks and Witherington were just pandering to a conservative Texas congregation.

DNA from the shroud????

Remember that internet hoax of a few years back - cloning Jesus?
Toto is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 05:53 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,635
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Toto
It has to do with the credibility of the people promoting it.
How so? They may be promoting it, but the heavily lifting scholarly work was done by others.

Quote:
Unless you want to argue that Shanks and Witherington were just pandering to a conservative Texas congregation.

DNA from the shroud????

Remember that internet hoax of a few years back - cloning Jesus?
I never thought much of Witherington or Shank's expertise in biology or forensic science. Neither of which has anything to do with the ossuary.

Just another attempt to "poison the well." Of course, you've got the wrong well and no poison.
Layman is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 06:11 PM   #8
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Heavy lifting scholarly work? You mean running the ossuary by a few experts to get a superficial ok, rushing to the newspapers before a full examination by the scholarly community?
Toto is offline  
Old 05-22-2003, 06:16 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,635
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Toto
Heavy lifting scholarly work? You mean running the ossuary by a few experts to get a superficial ok, rushing to the newspapers before a full examination by the scholarly community?
I mean letting leading experts examine the ossuary and having the Israel Geological Survey conduct additional tests. And there is nothing wrong with going to the press with what you believe is a huges story.

But as usual you have completely changed the subject. The fact is that neither Shanks nor Witherington are the leading scholars who have promoted the authenticy of the ossuary. They have publicized it, but that says nothing about the authenticity of the ossuary.

Nor would a horrible understanding of forensic science be very relevant to an expert in a completely foreign field.
Layman is offline  
Old 05-23-2003, 08:28 AM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: portland, oregon, usa
Posts: 1,190
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Layman
How so? They may be promoting it, but the heavily lifting scholarly work was done by others.


Correction: _Is_ being done. We still await the "heavy lifting scholarly work" from the two IAA commissions.

If the IGS did any scholarly work, either they, or the numbskulls at BAR, butchered it and arrived at, or alluded to, some unwarrented conclusions before it got into print. It had to be corrected and clarified by those outside the IGS. So far as I know, those corrections have never made it into print journal format.

Quote:
I never thought much of Witherington or Shank's expertise in biology or forensic science. Neither of which has anything to do with the ossuary.
Well... That's heartening.

Quote:
Just another attempt to "poison the well." Of course, you've got the wrong well and no poison.
"Poisoning the well"? What _are_ you on about? The OP just noted that Shanks and Witherington were engaged in some rather dubious "scholarly" undertakings with regards to the ossuary. Is posting factual information on those actions of self-styled "experts" (and ones that others have rubbed in our faces as being definitive scholars on the historic Jesus, which is laughable in the case of Shanks) considered "poisoning the well"?

I'm _still_ waiting to hear why my comment that both Raymond Brown and John P. Meier are/were invested and practicing Roman Catholic priests was "poisoning the well". Perhaps you could explain that for me, too?

godfry n. glad
godfry n. glad is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:18 PM.

Top

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