Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jesus tomb found and his ''bones'' are there.... :(

A few years ago I did a study in the death and resurection of the Lord Jesus Christ. A study that took me about two years and I read many books both in English, Spanish and Greek....I came away with a new understanding and appreciation for what Jesus did for me on that cross...One of the best books I read was by John MacArthur titled ''The Murder of Jesus''.....I would recommend this book to all....Here is a small sample of the book. I scanned it into my computer..Perhaps if I have the time I will scan it in chapter by chapter and post it... For now, enjoy the last part of the book

John records that as the hour grew late, the Sanhedrin wanted the bodies off the crosses, so that they would not remain there overnight and defile the Sabbath. “Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away†(John 19:31).
The Sabbath was a “high†Sabbath because it was the day after Passover, and therefore that particular Sabbath belonged to the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Sanhedrin’s pretentious reverence for the sacredness of the high Sabbath is ironic in light of how they were treating the Lord of the Sabbath Himself (cf. Mark 2:28). But it reveals again how they were wholly concerned merely for the appearance, and not the reality, of things. Old Testament law (Deuteronomy 21:23) strictly commanded that the body of anyone hanged on a tree be removed and buried out of sight, not left hanging all night. It is almost certain that most victims of Roman crucifixion were nonetheless left hanging on crosses for days. But this being Passover, it was an especially high Sabbath, so the Sanhedrin wanted the Jewish law observed. That is why they petitioned Pilate not to permit the bodies to remain on the crosses overnight. In order to keep their sanctimonious veneer intact, they now wanted Jesus to die, and die quickly.
As we noted on page 202, the breaking of the legs would make it certain that death would occur almost immediately, because once the legs could no longer push up to support the body’s weight, the diaphragm would be severely constricted, and air could not be expelled. The victim would die of asphyxiation within minutes. The cruel practice also guaranteed that the victim died with as much pain as possible.
Soldiers from Pilate therefore came to the crucifixion site with the express purpose of breaking the victims’ legs. John writes,
Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.†(19:32–36)
The legs of both criminals were broken. Within minutes, the forgiven thief was in Paradise with the Lord, who had preceded him to glory.
But the soldiers, finding Jesus already dead, decided not to break His bones. Instead, they pierced His side with a spear, to verify that He was dead. The blood and water that flowed out showed that He was. The watery fluid was probably excess serum that had collected in the pericardium (the membrane that encloses the heart). The blood was an indicator that the spear pierced the heart or aorta as well as the pericardium. The fact that blood and water came out separately from the same wound seems to indicate that death had occurred some period of time before the wound was inflicted, so that Christ’s bloodâ€â€even in the area of the heartâ€â€had already begun the process of coagulation.
Mark 15:43–44 says that after Jesus’ death, Joseph of Arimathea came to ask Pilate for the body of Jesus, and “Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time.†The relatively early hour at which Christ died surprised all those who were familiar with death by crucifixion. He died several hours before the typical crucifixion victim would have been expected to die. (Remember that crucifixion was designed to maximize the victim’s pain while prolonging the process of dying.)
But Christ died at such an early hour in order to demonstrate what He had once told the Jewish leaders: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father†(John 10:17–18, kjv). He was sovereign, even over the timing of His own death.
Even the soldiers’ failure to break His legs was a further fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy: “He guards all his bones; not one of them is broken†(Psalm 34:20). And thus from the beginning to the end of the crucifixion, Christ had remained sovereignly in charge. The Father’s will had been fulfilled to the letter, and dozens of Old Testament prophecies were specifically fulfilled.
Christ was dead, but death had not conquered Him. On the first day of the week, He would burst forth triumphantly from the grave and show Himself alive to hundreds of eyewitnesses (1 Corinthians 15:5–8). He not only atoned for sin, but He demonstrated His Mastery over death in the process.
The resurrection of Christ was a divine stamp of approval on the atonement He purchased through His dying. Paul wrote that Jesus was “declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead†(Romans 1:4). The Resurrection therefore gave immediate, dramatic, and tangible proof of the efficacy of Christ’s atoning death. The converse is true as well: It is the Cross, and what Jesus accomplished there, that gives the Resurrection its significance.
A thorough account of all the events and eyewitnesses surrounding Christ’s resurrection would fill another entire volume, so it is not possible to examine the biblical narratives of the Resurrection here. (Perhaps one day, if the Lord permits, I will have the opportunity to publish such a volume.) But it’s worth noting that the Resurrection is one of history’s most carefully scrutinized and best-attested facts. The enemies of the gospel from the apostles’ day until now have tried desperately to impeach the eyewitness testimony to Jesus’ resurrection. They have not been able to do so, nor will they.
Still, it is vital to see that the early church’s preaching focused as much on the death of Christ as on His resurrection. Paul wrote, “We preach Christ crucified†(1 Corinthians 1:23); “I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified†(2:2); and, “God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ†(Galatians 6:14).
Why did Paul place so much emphasis on the death of Christ, rather than always stressing the triumph of the Resurrection above even His death? Because, again, without the atoning work Christ did on the cross, His resurrection would be merely a wonder to stand back and admire. But it would have no personal ramifications for us. However, “if we died with Christ,â€Ââ€â€that is, if He died in our place and in our steadâ€â€then “we believe that we shall also live with Him†(Romans 6:8). Because of the death he died, suffering the penalty of sin on our behalf, we become partakers with Him in His resurrection as well. That is virtually the whole point of Romans 6.
So don’t ever pass over the meaning of the death of Christ on your way to celebrate the Resurrection. It is the Cross that gives meaning to the resurrection life. Only insofar as we are united with Him in the likeness of His death, can we be certain of being raised with Him in the likeness of His resurrection (cf. Romans 6:5).
That is why “Jesus Christ and Him crucified†remains the very heart and soul of the gospel message. Andin the words of the apostle Paul, every believer’s deepest yearning should be this: “That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead†(Philippians 3:10–11).

MacArthur.... The murder of Jesus : A study of how Jesus died.
 
Black Cat said:
Hi Gabby. Thanks for taking the time to answer some of my questions. I'm not really asking if heaven is "real." I'm just wondering whether you believe it is a physical place, composed of matter with volume and mass. I believe in an afterlife in the spiritual plane (which is what I believe people who are near death see), but the thought of an afterlife in a physical place, in your old physical body sounds more than a little strange to me. That appears to be what most Christians believe-- physical resurrection of the old body, in a physical heaven. Am I mistaken?
...
So here, are you saying that this "new body" is different than the old body?
...
I appreciate it!

No problem. That is what I am here for. :D
It begins in this life time. When you give your life to God, He begins a work in you like you could never imagine.
2Cr 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
When you are born again, you give your old life, and your old sinful nature to the Lord. Jesus paid for our sin, He takes it from us, and imputes to us His righteousness. The great exchange!

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

When one becomes born again, it means that they repent of their sin, confessing to God that they are a sinner, and they are sorry for it. It is admitting our need to be saved, and asking God for forgiveness. Many refer to this as "the sinners prayer". The next step, along with this confession, is telling God that you believe in His Son, Jesus Christ, to pay the price for your sin. Jesus bore our sin on the cross. On the third day, He rose from the dead, defeating death, hell, and the devil. "The wages of sin is death..." Jesus paid the price for us.

When you begin your walk with the Lord, you will find some changes in your life, and others may see something different about you. The Holy Spirit comes into your heart. This is a result of Jesus Christ making peace between you and God.

1Cr 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?


When you get to know the Lord, understand a bit more what He did for you, and how much He loves you, then you will find yourself wanting to draw closer to Him. You do that through prayer, reading the Bible, worship, and growing in His grace. The more you learn, the more you want to learn. The more you believe. The more you see His hand on your life. This is faith building in you.

A Christian walks by faith. You learn about His providence, His healing power, you learn about eternal life, as well as becoming more aware of the things that Jesus saved you from.


I don't know if you know your way around a Bible or not. If not, let me know and I can help you with that. There are lots of on-line Bibles that you can use, as well. Anyway...There is a passage that begins here (1 Cor. 15:35) that speaks of the resurrected body. If you like, I can post the entire passage.

1Cr 15:35 ¶ But some [man] will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

It goes on a bit about this great exchange we make when we give our lives to Christ, and the resulting trade. (We trade up. Always!) And it speaks about when we finally get where we are going...

1Cr 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality.

1Cr 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

And there are countless passages about a time when all of the corruption ends, and there will be a new heavens and a new earth.

2Pe 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Have you ever heard the song "I can only imagine"? It makes me homesick :wink:

I hope this helps answer some questions. And I hope it inspires more :D

Blessings!
 
jgredline said:
A few years ago I did a study in the death and resurection of the Lord Jesus Christ. A study that took me about two years and I read many books both in English, Spanish and Greek....I came away with a new understanding and appreciation for what Jesus did for me on that cross...One of the best books I read was by John MacArthur titled ''The Murder of Jesus''.....I would recommend this book to all....Here is a small sample of the book. I scanned it into my computer..Perhaps if I have the time I will scan it in chapter by chapter and post it... For now, enjoy the last part of the book

John records that as the hour grew late, the Sanhedrin wanted the bodies off the crosses, so that they would not remain there overnight and defile the Sabbath. “Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away†(John 19:31).
The Sabbath was a “high†Sabbath because it was the day after Passover, and therefore that particular Sabbath belonged to the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Sanhedrin’s pretentious reverence for the sacredness of the high Sabbath is ironic in light of how they were treating the Lord of the Sabbath Himself (cf. Mark 2:28). But it reveals again how they were wholly concerned merely for the appearance, and not the reality, of things. Old Testament law (Deuteronomy 21:23) strictly commanded that the body of anyone hanged on a tree be removed and buried out of sight, not left hanging all night. It is almost certain that most victims of Roman crucifixion were nonetheless left hanging on crosses for days. But this being Passover, it was an especially high Sabbath, so the Sanhedrin wanted the Jewish law observed. That is why they petitioned Pilate not to permit the bodies to remain on the crosses overnight. In order to keep their sanctimonious veneer intact, they now wanted Jesus to die, and die quickly.
As we noted on page 202, the breaking of the legs would make it certain that death would occur almost immediately, because once the legs could no longer push up to support the body’s weight, the diaphragm would be severely constricted, and air could not be expelled. The victim would die of asphyxiation within minutes. The cruel practice also guaranteed that the victim died with as much pain as possible.
Soldiers from Pilate therefore came to the crucifixion site with the express purpose of breaking the victims’ legs. John writes,
Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.†(19:32–36)
The legs of both criminals were broken. Within minutes, the forgiven thief was in Paradise with the Lord, who had preceded him to glory.
But the soldiers, finding Jesus already dead, decided not to break His bones. Instead, they pierced His side with a spear, to verify that He was dead. The blood and water that flowed out showed that He was. The watery fluid was probably excess serum that had collected in the pericardium (the membrane that encloses the heart). The blood was an indicator that the spear pierced the heart or aorta as well as the pericardium. The fact that blood and water came out separately from the same wound seems to indicate that death had occurred some period of time before the wound was inflicted, so that Christ’s bloodâ€â€even in the area of the heartâ€â€had already begun the process of coagulation.
Mark 15:43–44 says that after Jesus’ death, Joseph of Arimathea came to ask Pilate for the body of Jesus, and “Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time.†The relatively early hour at which Christ died surprised all those who were familiar with death by crucifixion. He died several hours before the typical crucifixion victim would have been expected to die. (Remember that crucifixion was designed to maximize the victim’s pain while prolonging the process of dying.)
But Christ died at such an early hour in order to demonstrate what He had once told the Jewish leaders: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father†(John 10:17–18, kjv). He was sovereign, even over the timing of His own death.
Even the soldiers’ failure to break His legs was a further fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy: “He guards all his bones; not one of them is broken†(Psalm 34:20). And thus from the beginning to the end of the crucifixion, Christ had remained sovereignly in charge. The Father’s will had been fulfilled to the letter, and dozens of Old Testament prophecies were specifically fulfilled.
Christ was dead, but death had not conquered Him. On the first day of the week, He would burst forth triumphantly from the grave and show Himself alive to hundreds of eyewitnesses (1 Corinthians 15:5–8). He not only atoned for sin, but He demonstrated His Mastery over death in the process.
The resurrection of Christ was a divine stamp of approval on the atonement He purchased through His dying. Paul wrote that Jesus was “declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead†(Romans 1:4). The Resurrection therefore gave immediate, dramatic, and tangible proof of the efficacy of Christ’s atoning death. The converse is true as well: It is the Cross, and what Jesus accomplished there, that gives the Resurrection its significance.
A thorough account of all the events and eyewitnesses surrounding Christ’s resurrection would fill another entire volume, so it is not possible to examine the biblical narratives of the Resurrection here. (Perhaps one day, if the Lord permits, I will have the opportunity to publish such a volume.) But it’s worth noting that the Resurrection is one of history’s most carefully scrutinized and best-attested facts. The enemies of the gospel from the apostles’ day until now have tried desperately to impeach the eyewitness testimony to Jesus’ resurrection. They have not been able to do so, nor will they.
Still, it is vital to see that the early church’s preaching focused as much on the death of Christ as on His resurrection. Paul wrote, “We preach Christ crucified†(1 Corinthians 1:23); “I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified†(2:2); and, “God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ†(Galatians 6:14).
Why did Paul place so much emphasis on the death of Christ, rather than always stressing the triumph of the Resurrection above even His death? Because, again, without the atoning work Christ did on the cross, His resurrection would be merely a wonder to stand back and admire. But it would have no personal ramifications for us. However, “if we died with Christ,â€Ââ€â€that is, if He died in our place and in our steadâ€â€then “we believe that we shall also live with Him†(Romans 6:8). Because of the death he died, suffering the penalty of sin on our behalf, we become partakers with Him in His resurrection as well. That is virtually the whole point of Romans 6.
So don’t ever pass over the meaning of the death of Christ on your way to celebrate the Resurrection. It is the Cross that gives meaning to the resurrection life. Only insofar as we are united with Him in the likeness of His death, can we be certain of being raised with Him in the likeness of His resurrection (cf. Romans 6:5).
That is why “Jesus Christ and Him crucified†remains the very heart and soul of the gospel message. And in the words of the apostle Paul, every believer’s deepest yearning should be this: “That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead†(Philippians 3:10–11).

MacArthur.... The murder of Jesus : A study of how Jesus died.

Jgred - thanks for the book reccomendation. I have ordered it off of Amazon and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival. I love books and am actually looking for something that will help me understand the KJV a little better, such as a study aid. Do you know of any?

Sorry to get off topic...

I am impressed however, no bones were found in the tomb. BUT! I was watching Larry King Live the other night and James Cameron did mention that when this tomb was originally found in 1980 I believe, they said the under some type of tradition, the bones were transferred and re-buried and are now under the guard of heavy security. Did I hear this right?
 
ZaksDarlin said:
Jgred - thanks for the book reccomendation. I have ordered it off of Amazon and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival. I love books and am actually looking for something that will help me understand the KJV a little better, such as a study aid. Do you know of any?

Sorry to get off topic...

I am impressed however, no bones were found in the tomb. BUT! I was watching Larry King Live the other night and James Cameron did mention that when this tomb was originally found in 1980 I believe, they said the under some type of tradition, the bones were transferred and re-buried and are now under the guard of heavy security. Did I hear this right?

You will be blessed beyond anything you can imagine. The first time I read the book, I sat down and read through it in two days....
 
I'm kind of disappointed in many Christians, who have attacked this without knowing much about it. A few came out on television right away ripping it as all part of the Dan Brown stuff. They jumped the gun. For starters, this guy, not Cameron, the journalist, is not anti-Christian. He did a whole documentary that I think made a compelling case for the truth of the Exodus tale based on historical evidence scholars have ignored. There are many alternate explanations for what he found, that could still relate to Jesus. For example, "son of" does not necessarily mean literally, etc. Not saying that's what it is, I don't know. All I'm saying is, the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

Or it could be total garbage. I'm inclined to say it is probably this. But that doesn't make it anti-Christian. This guy is anything but anti-Christian.
 
Muad'Dib said:
I'm kind of disappointed in many Christians, who have attacked this without knowing much about it. A few came out on television right away ripping it as all part of the Dan Brown stuff. They jumped the gun. For starters, this guy, not Cameron, the journalist, is not anti-Christian. He did a whole documentary that I think made a compelling case for the truth of the Exodus tale based on historical evidence scholars have ignored. There are many alternate explanations for what he found, that could still relate to Jesus. For example, "son of" does not necessarily mean literally, etc. Not saying that's what it is, I don't know. All I'm saying is, the truth could be somewhere in the middle.

Or it could be total garbage. I'm inclined to say it is probably this. But that doesn't make it anti-Christian. This guy is anything but anti-Christian.

Anti-christian? Perhaps not militant, or aggressively. What he is claiming is not the truth. You see, Christians serve a risen Saviour. The tomb has been empty for 2000 years. To claim to have found the remains of the body of Jesus Christ, is to deny Christ.

The truth can not be somewhere in the middle.
 
I am a Christian, so I know all about that. But I don't think you understood what I meant by "somewhere in the middle". I am suggesting there are other explanations for why bones would be in there. This is just one example, but let's say the Romans started asking questions. After all, they had just executed Jesus. They wouldn't like all these stories of resurrection. Perhaps it was a body double. I'm not saying that's the case. Like I said, I'm not endorsing this as authentic. What I am saying is, it is in no way, shape, or form anti-Christian. This is a man who has supported other parts of the Bible, and been attacked for doing so.

It should trouble many that the same people who deny the divinity of Christ are on "our" side in opposition to this discover. Look at who your allies are.

Although I will say not all Christians believe Christ had to rise bodily into heaven as part of the resurrection. They may be wrong, but you seem to be trying to say what is and isn't Christian. Only God dictates the truth, with all due respect. All we can do is try to facilitate His message.
 
Muad'Dib said:
What I am saying is, it is in no way, shape, or form anti-Christian...
....Although I will say not all Christians believe Christ had to rise bodily into heaven as part of the resurrection.
Ahh...but it is. He claims to have found the remains of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is alive. He rose from the dead. This is the core of Christianity. The danger is not to the Christian. The Christian believes Scripture over some silly documentary. The wicked thing that this reported find does, is to those who do not yet know Christ.
Praise God for Romans 8:28. God can take this documentary and bring people to the cross with it, and through that, find the risen Saviour.

Muad'Dib said:
... but you seem to be trying to say what is and isn't Christian.

This is exactly what I am doing.

Muad'Dib said:
Only God dictates the truth, with all due respect. All we can do is try to facilitate His message.

Truth is truth. Even if it is Gabbylittleangel that is proclaiming it. :wink:
 
Muad'Dib said:
Although I will say not all Christians believe Christ had to rise bodily into heaven as part of the resurrection. .

Placing the label of Christian on such people is an oxymoron...


Many will come in that day and proclaim to be Christians but will be told that He never knew them. Christianity is not a salad bar to pick and choose what they want to believe...


As far as this person claiming to have found the bones of Jesus, I only have this to say....

Matthew 24:22-24

22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
 
A false prophet is one who takes themselves as God and attempts to administer judgment in His place. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But I think you are treading on thin ice my friend.

Gabbylittleangel

Ahh...but it is. He claims to have found the remains of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is alive. He rose from the dead. This is the core of Christianity. The danger is not to the Christian. The Christian believes Scripture over some silly documentary. The wicked thing that this reported find does, is to those who do not yet know Christ.

I agree with half that. But just because he claims they are the remains, doesn't mean there aren't alternate explanations. It certainly doesn't make him anti-Christian. There's a difference between being incorrect and being a bigot.

If this turns someone away from Christianity, I can't imagine they had a very strong faith to begin with.

This is exactly what I am doing.

I don't think that is something a one should do, personally, but I understand where you are coming from.

Truth is truth. Even if it is Gabbylittleangel that is proclaiming it

I understand what you are saying. Maybe I'm blinded by his other work. I've seen him defend the stories of the Old Testament as historically accurate.
 
Muad'Dib said:
A false prophet is one who takes themselves as God and attempts to administer judgment in His place. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But I think you are treading on thin ice my friend.

No thin ice here. I am standing on a firm foundation. The rock. I am neither a false prophet, nor administering judgment in His place.


Muad'Dib said:
I understand what you are saying. Maybe I'm blinded by his other work. I've seen him defend the stories of the Old Testament as historically accurate.


Muad'Dib said:
I agree with half that. But just because he claims they are the remains, doesn't mean there aren't alternate explanations. It certainly doesn't make him anti-Christian. There's a difference between being incorrect and being a bigot.

If this turns someone away from Christianity, I can't imagine they had a very strong faith to begin with.

Mat 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.


Muad'Dib said:
I don't think that is something a one should do, personally, but I understand where you are coming from.

Proclaiming truth? Proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ? You don't think that is something that one should do? Jesus commands us to do so.

Mat 10:7 And as ye go, preach...

Mat 10:27 What I tell you in darkness, [that] speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, [that] preach ye upon the housetops.

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature....


Muad'Dib said:
I understand what you are saying. Maybe I'm blinded by his other work. I've seen him defend the stories of the Old Testament as historically accurate.

Stick with the Scriptures. When the things that this man claims contradict Scripture, believe Scripture over him.
 
Mr. James Cameron, three-time-Oscar-winning Canadian film director, is a 33rd Degree Freemason (R.A. Coombes, author of "America, The Babylon: America's Destiny, Foretold In Biblical Prophecy" -- in an email dated 2/25/2007).

Is it any wonder why he would want to push a lie on the population?
 
I want to assure people here who are Christians that feel this stuff is thrown in everyone's face by the world. I was starting to watch the 2 hours show tonight on Discovery about this. After the first hour I turned it off because I saw a severe error in their statistics. The show mentioned 4 names, Jesus, 2 Josephs and "Maria" that they found in the tombs. They suggested that although he names were common, the odds of them occurring together is small, and therefore the critics of Christianity conclude this must be Jesus' (and his family's) tomb.

Take it from a math minor here that had a perfect score in my Stat final. The odds do not favor this being Jesus' family tomb. Why?

The show claimed that 4% of men were called Jesus. 25% were called Mary and so forth. If we do the math, and I'll be gracious and favor the critics side, what if the odds of four common names occurring together were one in 10,000? Sounds awfully small, eh? But what people do not realize is that this means one in every ten thousand families will have these combinations. Were there at least that many families in Jesus' time? Of course. IN fact, there were more. What about at least 100,000 families? Quite possible. That means even with these phenomenally small odds, about 10 families would have these combination of names! So the odds of this being Jesus' family tomb is less chance than rolling a specific number once on a die!

I was accused of not understanding odds because I believe the possibility of bible codes, but in this case, I can clearly see the statistics don't add up! The critics would have us believe they do!
 
Solo said:
Mr. James Cameron, three-time-Oscar-winning Canadian film director, is a 33rd Degree Freemason (R.A. Coombes, author of "America, The Babylon: America's Destiny, Foretold In Biblical Prophecy" -- in an email dated 2/25/2007).

Is it any wonder why he would want to push a lie on the population?

Thank you Michael for your post. We are going to see more of this raking in of lies against Christians by these Freemasons. How anyone can be taken in by this trash is beyond me! Thank you Jesus that I know you personally, and YOU are the TRUTH!
 
I am waiting for it to come on....I am only going to view it to find the things specifically wrong with it, so it gives me the right to be critical...Kinda like voting...If one does not vote, he has no right to criticize our elected officals...
 
I was hoping Jesus's ossuary would have had a title like Mary's did. Hers was embellished with "Master" but Jesus only got "son of Joseph". And there was no evidence that all dead in the tomb were related since most of the ossuaries were supposed to have been vacuumed before any DNA testing could be done, except those of Jesus and Mary.
Like the Da Vinci Code at first glance this too looks compelling to say the least. So I suppose I'll be patient and see what comes of all of this.
But I still think they could have at least inscribed "Rabbi" or something to that effect on Jesus's ossuary.
 
Hopefully I will have a little more time a little later and write a little more.....As for the ''documentary'' last night, I only viewed the the first 45 minutes or so, before I flipped the channel to the history channel and watched a piece they had on the dark ages...At-least they were more accurate....None the less...In the first few minutes, I learned that Jesus Had 4 brothers and they are even mentioned in the bible One whos name is ''jose''...LOL...I also learned that Matthew is a relative of Jesus....First they said ''brother'' then distant cousin...
Mary's name is really ''Maria''....so lets see...We have a Jose and Maria.... :roll:

Anyway, I will finish viewing it later...
 
Did they address in the documentary - I do not have cable so I will not be viewing it - why they found the bombs in Jerusalem? Let's assume for the sake of discussion that Jesus's bones were found - why would they be buried in Jerusalem?

Now - rest assured, that I do not believe that they found the bones of Jesus - and the resurrection makes this discussion moot. However, it would seem that they (the producers, makers, followers of the film) would have some pretty high hurdles to overcome.
 
Back
Top