thunderbolt Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Ok, this is a new one to me, from this site: Ossuary engravings Many first century Jewish coffins, or "ossuaries" are inscribed with the sign of the cross or the name of Jesus. In 1873, ossuaries were found near Bethany containing the inscribed names of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, each with the sign of a cross. Mary, Martha, and Lazarus were followers of Jesus described in the Bible. Another was inscribed in Greek, "Jesus, the Redeemer." Still another was inscribed with "Jesus, the LORD (Jehovah)." The ossuary of Matthias (possibly the disciple who replaced Judas) was inscribed "Jesus is [Jehovah]." It would be inconceivable that so many ossuaries would attest to faith in Jesus Christ as God if his claims were mere stories. Anyone have any material on this? But you have to love how they say "A great deal of archeological evidence proves that Jesus was a real person and that (in a general sense) the things the Bible claims about him are true." and then goes on to claim four things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Found this. I swear, if I lived in the middle east I would have discovered all sorts of relics to prove jesus existed, only to turn around and my an insane profit from the catholic church. Heck, they even pay for a piece of toast with a jesus face burned into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Forgery is always a strong possibility... but I never claimed to have thought that Jesus didn't exist. I am sure he did. But since those are from a Christian site, their report of the findings is untrustworthy, IMO. No references, no nothing... just speculation. And the fact that these "findings" are not in many scholarly books on archaelogical evidence from the time of Jesus makes me even more suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 They are all Christian forgeries, and having a cross on them proves it. If I remember correctly, the cross wasn't a Christian symbol until much later (century or so) and the greek word that has been translated "cross" should be "stake" (stearos). The Jehovah Witnesses have that much down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 How do suppose they know they're first century and not second? You don't think they'd use Satan's tool of carbon dating, do you? IF they're genuine, it proves there were christians. Big revelation there. I mean, it's like someone 2,000 years from now digging up the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City, and saying it proves that Joseph Smith's visions really were authentic and inspired by angels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 They are all Christian forgeries, and having a cross on them proves it. If I remember correctly, the cross wasn't a Christian symbol until much later (century or so) and the greek word that has been translated "cross" should be "stake" (stearos). The Jehovah Witnesses have that much down. Oh yeah! That's right! I remember now. They are most definitely forgeries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texmex2003 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 I remember watching a documentry on Pompeii where they found a cross engraved into a wall. They archeologist were trying to figure out what it meant since the sign of the cross was not a Paulist sign in that time frame. The sign of the cult was the sign of the "fish" at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 I remember watching a documentry on Pompeii where they found a cross engraved into a wall. They archeologist were trying to figure out what it meant since the sign of the cross was not a Paulist sign in that time frame. The sign of the cult was the sign of the "fish" at that time. I asked a colleague who is an archeologist and who has worked at and published on Pompeii. Here's her answer: "I am indeed on vacation, so I don't have my books in front of me -- but I think that the "graffito" in question might be one from Herculaneum which is kind of famous. It's actually an impression on a wall rather than a graffito, and, it turns out, is really the remains of a wall/roofing joist rather than an actual cross symbol. This didn't stop the early excavators, however, from claiming it as evidence that there were Christians active in the Bay of Naples in 79 CE. In truth, though, you are correct: the cross was not a Christian symbol in active use at the time." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 This didn't stop the early excavators,however, from claiming it as evidence that there were Christians active in the Bay of Naples in 79 CE. In truth, though, you are correct: the cross was not a Christian symbol in active use at the time." Kind of pathetic, the lengths that christians will go to to try and find evidence for their religion. They will find Jesus' face on a grilled cheese sandwich, look for window steam stains of the virgin mary, claim that rock formations are the remnants of Noah's ark, claim they've found chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea, or claim they've found evidence for Jesus when they know goddamn good and well it's phony. And it's been that way since the beginning. It takes a lot of sorting through the shit to try and find the truth. Sickening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted March 12, 2006 Author Share Posted March 12, 2006 Good stuff you guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts