Name:Red •
Title: Galileo only reported what what saw.... •
Date posted: 03/05/07 16:30
Q: When Galileo peered through his light bucket, he saw things. What he saw he wrote. What he wrote down was fundamentaly diffrent than what the current establishment believed to be the case concerning the subject. AT THIS POINT Fact rubbed with opinion. The establishment seen these these discoveries as "attacks" against the "faith". Galileo was exiled for life and his work banned.
Now, What was the Church really banning? What was it that was attacking them?
We now know that the earth is not the center of the universe.
I realize today that the vatican doesnt order "fatwahs" against science and it's discoveries. The Church doesnt have to. The "Fatwah's" are ingrained in peoples hearts to the point of automation.
This investigative peice is NOT an attack on christianity no more than the discovery of the cause of the black death. A bacterium was the culprit in that case and NOT a 'Curse". However, many will interpit the postulate in the documentry as an "attack on Christianity", and this is expected.
People who have since childhood believed through fear that virgin Births are possible, and bringing the dead back to life well after de-composition, (lazarus), will find it Equally as hard to believe it cant happen. Any Proof that it doesnt happen is not comprehended.
I dont think these discoveries are attacks. For the last 1500 years it has been the CHURCH making the claims. Everyone knows when you make a claim you must back it up. The Church made the claims and backed them up with force and fear. These actions dont make the claims true. Now, the documentry makes claims too. However, these claims are POSTULATES . These theories were based on evidence. It is the EVIDENCE thats key here, not necasarily the claims. The claims are only estimated opinions based on the evidence.
Skeptics want more proof. That's great. But these same skeptics cant accept the possibilies of what these findings suggest. They cant accept the possibilities of goings on that are normal for the human race. (a female needs SPERM to get pregnant), People are BURIED when they die, No matter WHO they are.. ect......
The Vatican is probably sitting on books and scrolls that were left out by vote at the council Of Trent. (around 30? )These writings did not enter the "compilation" for various reasons. Logic will dictate one reason . They COULD NOT have accepted certain books because the majority already had an agenda they believed. If an old book differed from the current belief, it was voted out.
Scholars will tell you that the MAIN reason was Authenticity. Hogwash. It was never agreed who wrote revelations, but it wound up there. .
There were more books (like some of the acts and letters) that were hotly debated but were allowed .
My point is , the Bible is historical to a point, but endowed with lavishings that do not happen in the reality we currently utilize. This was the way in those days, I guess ,as a way to cope with things not understood.
Name:GaryR54 •
Date: 03/05/07 23:39
A: Another thing to bear in mind, also, is that the authors of this film/book have not only offered their evidence, they have done a fair job of testing it themselves, leaving the outcome of that testing to chance. There is no way to fake DNA results, for example. Not only have they tested their own data to see if it holds up, they have offered several different hypotheses based upon their findings, as opposed to looking for facts that fit their viewpoint (as they've been wrongly accused of doing).
Another aspect of their research into this very thought provoking issue is that the authors have invited all to participate, whatever their viewpoint or agenda may be. Would they behave this way if they intended to "discredit Christianity?" Also, their use of DNA research was only to establish whether or not the James ossuary was the missing ossuary. Had they had good DNA samples, they could have gone much further, testing Joseph's, Mary's and Jesus' DNA against each other to determine whether they were related or not. Had they done so, they might have been able to answer the age old question of whether the immaculate conception and virgin birth are fact or fiction. This could have been easily established if Joseph's DNA turned out to show no relationship to Jesus' DNA, or if it showed a relationship. Any relatedness would have immediately suggested that Jesus was in fact a son of Joseph and, therefore, was not divine. Conversely, if the DNA had shown no relationship between Joseph and Jesus, this would tend to suggest the virgin birth has some credence, afterall. That the authors didn't take their research that far is proof of no ill intent on their part. Yet, many Christians bristle at the mere suggestion that there might be any evidence that could disprove their cherished beliefs. Isn't this much like the bristling of Muslims who cannot abide any criticism of Muhammed?
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/06/07 14:41
A: GaryR54 ,
Good point. So if the Christians persue the DNA evidence path, the death of bodily resurrection is on thier hands.
