Name:Gerri •
Title: Shame on Ted Koppel and his "Debate" •
Date posted: 03/05/07 8:31
Q: This was not a debate - it was a crucifiction! Shame on you, Ted Koppel!! I am disappointed in your bad form and (transparent) tactless behavior. Someone with your level of experience should have done a better job MODERATING discussion rather than trying to attack Simcha and the professor. Tell me honestly - is Catholicism a cult where you really know the tenets are ridiculous - but everyone agrees to publicly believe the nonsense - to fit in - to BELONG - for whatever reason - or do you honestly believe this stuff? To be saved - immortal - etc. Here's a newsflash - YOU are human - Jesus was human - and there is no after life. Heaven is the fantasy we speak of and hope for to ease the thought of death. Also the EGO has a need to believe it is immortal. It isn't. This is it. Come to grips.....though I agree the fantasy is more pleasant. I suppose we - none of us - want to believe that 2000 yrs after our death - our bone dust is all that remains - but hey - you SAW the proof.
While the film did have dramatic elements - Ted should not have lost sight of the fact that the tomb and the names found WERE DISCOVERED - not fictional. He should have also had a balanced approach - rather than attempting to shoot holes in Simcha's hard work with BLATANT attempts to underhandedly discredit him. ...by using Simcha's words against him. This type of work is a journey - and people get nervous with the press and sometimes mis-speak. Even you, TED, have mis-spoken....only others have had the CLASS not to rub YOUR face in it.
I think the film showed an attempt on Simcha's part to involve experts and ask questions - follow leads....as a good journalist would. The dramatic elements were there simply to try to build a story around THE EVIDENCE. A hyothesis - (a guess) about what really was - vs. the bible stories - based on what was ACTUALLY FOUND....and the statistical IMprobability that the tomb belongs to anyone else. Typically when "circumstantial evidence" contiunues to pile up - it's no longer circumstancial...it all keeps clicking until "voila!" There you have it. ...PROOF. Where is your common sense? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck - guess what - it's not a goose! It's a Duck! So why are we IDIOTS when it comes to religion? And why are you so "betrayed" and angry with this hypothesis? Because it reminds you of when Mommy and Daddy had to tell you that Santa was fiction, too? Because it contradicts the New Testament? Welcome to the REAL world. You don't still believe in Santa do you? Virgin births and disappearing bones - right up there with Moses parting the sea and Easter Bunny. ALL religions have their TALES. It IS ACTUALLY possible to believe in God AND have mind of your own. ....or you can send $9.95 to Tammy Fay and call her with your problem - I hear she has a personal relationship with the lord and she can SAVE you. Remind me to sell you a bridge when you hang up with Tammy. GET A LIFE!!!!
Nice touch though - bringing 3 religious people into the mix...as if their knowledge of the bible (the King James version of the new testament) somehow discredits Sincha's findings.....evidence. Any learned individual knows that there are HUGE gaps between science (what's real) and the fictional tales found in the new testament .....which - by the way, was written centuries after Christ's death and has been edited over the centuries - several times. Are people really so LOST that they follow the New Testament as if it fell from God's hands, from the sky.
I think Ted took the position of that which he believed to be the reaction of "the masses" (aka the mindless lemmings - with a STRONG desire to fit in - and be liked) in this country - which is why I suspect he behaved (as badly) as he did....so folks would continue to like him. Unfortunately, we're a country of lemmings - who don't think for ourselves and blindly follow any moron because of his "Chirstian values." Our "elected" president if evidence of this - what an embarassment - to have this man represent the US - but hey - he's friends with Billy Graham - leader of the lost souls you find head-bobbing under the evangelical tents- so hey - let's vote for him - despite that he's a moron and if you ever read a book and knew what he really represented and how it was to your detriment - you'd NEVER vote for him.
Simcha is an awarded colleague of Koppel's - and Koppel was impolite and tactless. Simcha's and the professor's calm - and CLASS - in comparison - only served to strengthen the validity of their very serious - and most likely true - hypothesis.
Simcha - you must press on and PROVE this find - so the world can go on in truth - and see the Vatican for what it is - a criminal entity - willfully perpetuating myth for their own gain. Then - I'd like to see Ted and his 3 "experts" eat some crow.
The sad thing is - the "truth" will not wash out the brainwashing that the church as been doing for centuries - to the public's detriment and their own betterment (weath and power). God may (or may not) be real - but organized religion is man made. Period. THAT is undisputed fact.
Hey Ted - Don't tell me you still believe in the Easter Bunny, too....by the way - I hear Emily Post has a book out that you may benefit from.
Name:graham •
Date: 03/05/07 8:52
A: again look at the facts..........out of 10 ossuaries he picked the ones that would support his hypothesis.....and journalism is not about hypothesis and concecture.....at least it was not supposed to be anyway......your to busy wanting to believe him that you won't seek the truth yourself....typical.....or even ask the questions or address his methods and posting them as fact.....fact is you liked what the simcha said and are already brainwashed by him....sheep.....
Name:BlessedChildofGod333 •
Date: 03/05/07 10:23
A: I agree only with the first sentence, the rest is a rant......
BUT , it was very clear that Mr. Koppel was there to be "The Voice of Opposition" to run a debate properly you don't take sides and you also ask better questions.
Very disappointing, but not unusual. This is one reason I don't like to watch ABC news.
Name:mjva •
Date: 03/05/07 11:18
A: I thought the parts about the documentaries "dramatizations" was especially unfair and laughable. What have movie makers and religious people been doing for years with bible stories? Answer - the SAME dramatic thing. WOW! Did you not hear yourself Mr. Ted? Mr. Ted...why did you slant on the side of religion? What is the truth there?
Name:KristieG •
Date: 03/05/07 11:51
A: I agree about the Koppel debate being a SHAM. A proper panel should have an unbiased facilitator asking leading questions of the experts. He also did not asseble a group of experts. He had two guys who did not like the program, but provided no experts who felt that the information was compelling and warranted further study. He just put the film makers up there to defend themselves. A true panel would have included a group of people (more than 2), some of which agreed and some of which did not. I turned it off after a half hour because it was disgusting. I dont know how Discovery could have allowed such a sham of a panel discussion.
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/05/07 12:40
A: Greetings All,
Yes the Koppel debate was very one sided and if it was truly a debate then Koppel should have read the question (given by the oppossite sides) and given both's sides the same amount of time to answer.
It was an interview, a phoney one at that, as it clearly stood out as to who he was sympathetic to. And most will assuredly be led out on left field just like the WMD lie about Saddam.
I find it amazing how peoples ears close down to the many times that it was said during the documentary that all is speculation, but here are the statistics.
I also find it a bit dull that the only derogatory comment that anyone can make is about the dramatization scenes. So what, no one can figure out on thier own drama scenes?
I find it amusing that Koppel argued this topic or even brought it up in the sense that educated people can't figure out what was drama and what was documentary. Is he calling everyone stupid? Well, maybe in a community that holds the body higher than the spirit it could be true, and that was his point.
In a society where we vote movie stars into office as serious candidates and hold the rich and famous as ManGods, I can see where some might think that was Actually Jesus and Mary Magdelelne living in wedded bliss.
Here's a real question; In regards to DNA and why only the bone fragments from the Marriamne and Jesus ossuary were tested because all the others were put on display and were cleaned, Why is it that the Jesus and Marriemne ossuaries were never displayed the same way?
Why were they not cleaned?
Why were they kept hidden from public viewing ? Maybe for obvious reasons?
Come on now, given the answer to a question, if I made the film I would know for sure would be one of the first arguements made, I would surely have my ducks in a row on this particular problem. And possibly added this mystery to my many arguements in the film.
So here's the real question. now maybe a viable discussion between both sides can now take place.
The Koppel interview was nothing but a head hunt. And not a very productive one at that.
Peace
SW
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 14:25
A: The rant wasn't worth the read, but I find it a little odd: I disliked the Koppel interview because some of the important questions (such as their reliance on questionable documents to identify Mary Magdalene with Mariamne in the tomb) weren't ask: I felt that over all, Koppel was throwing Simcha softballs, and Simcha simply wasn't able to do anything with them - his work on the NT, in general, is of a far different quality than his OT stuff, probably due to a lack in any serious background study.
Then again, this may be the difference between scholarly opinions and lay opinions.
Name:guahould •
Date: 03/05/07 14:37
A: Hey Gerri,,,, WTFG !!!!!!! perfectly said,, I copy that totally!!!!!!
Name:guahould •
Date: 03/05/07 14:38
A: MAN!!!! I wish all the thumpers would stop asking for facts to be looked at ,, it is so rediculous coming from their minds!!
Name:guahould •
Date: 03/05/07 14:47
A: Bottom line,, this specualtion is far far far more believable than the nonsense in the bible and i wish the believers would just stop trying to come off as the intelligent ones here ,, continuously speaking of looking at the facts.. Just exactly what facts do they have ?????? FACTS?? Notta,, zippo,, none!!!!! Just a fable book passed down and changed along time to suite whoever is making the fortunes from the crap.. again ,,,,,WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!!! And we all still wait for peter coton tail on easter too right and santa on christmas ,, or ,, like one said here ,, still waitin on their parents to let them down off of that one.
Name:abezos •
Date: 03/05/07 16:30
A: I completely agree. Ted Koppel was a moderator with an agenda, and his agenda was clear, TO DESCREDIT the very well made and dignified presentation of the documentary. I don't know if the reason was to placate the religious people but the debate looked more like an Inquisition in which Ted Koppel grabbed any minutia such as the semantics of the word "match" in relation to the work done on the patina, or whether the dramatization of the scenes were problematic (?)... with a definite purpose of minimizing the impact the documentaty could cause. I didn't hear a word of praise for the valiant work of finding the tomb (a second time)!, for the detective work performed among not very cooperative surroundings, and finally for the amazing statistical conclusions done in a project which seemingly did not have a great deal of resources. Ted Koppel's performance was shameful, for his lack of expertise and for his biased and pre-conceived notions on the subject and it was also shameful that The Discovery Channel would allowed such shameful excuse of a commentary after such a brave attempt at digging up the truth. The performance of the team of Sincha Jacobovici and the other gentleman was testimony to their character and they came out as truly professionals, well versed and quite engaging, while the other puppets were rather incoherent, hung up on esoterica and at least one of them very combatant.
By the way, I tried to post this complete commentary on the Discovery Channel Forum, and have so far being censured.
Name:shweetdreamz •
Date: 03/05/07 16:50
A: I agree with the orignal poster. The debate was clearly very biased. Ted Koppel was downright rude to Simcha. The worst thing was the way it was organized...you had a film-maker pitched against 5 individuals who were professors of theology, church heads etc. It was obvious which side was more eloquent than the other. Simcha obviously could not speak in the vague rhetorical way the professors spoke (it was easy to see they had nothing siginificant to say except rhetoric about the public needing to be more critical....haha! now what would happen if the public started following that advice and becoming critical of religious texts?...wouldnt be too good now would it?)
On top of everything, the host himself was CLEARLY biased and took pleasure in criticizing Simcha while he smiled at all the professors of theology. It was quite a spectacle! Although I did like one line by one of the guests that said "in the end people will believe what they are more inclined to believe"
Name:shweetdreamz •
Date: 03/05/07 16:52
A: And to add to that, the holier-than-thou jonathan reed started on a very rude note by attacking Simcha personally by calling his documentary akin to Porn. Very Fickle and low.
Name:cdonaldson •
Date: 03/05/07 20:43
A: I agree with most who have replied to this post, the first sentence is right on target and the rest comes across as a secularist rant.
I also agree that on several occasions, Simcha and Dr. Tabor were provided easy openings that both, for what ever reason, failed to capitalize on. Maybe they were under the impression that they were there to engage in an open discussion versus a rigged debate. Debates require adequate preparation. Their frustration was palpable early in the program and after a certain point both seemed to lose interest and back off. I particularly liked when Ted cut Simcha off by saying that he (Simcha) had had the last two hours to state his position. Well, mainstream Christianity has had the last two thousand years to state their orthodox position and the archeological community has had the last 27 years since the original find to perform an extensive and scientifically sound excavation! What wasn’t addressed (unless I missed it) was who was actually pushing to have the find literally covered up and not investigated further. Was it just a matter of a developer losing “X” amount of Shekels until construction resumed?
I believe Dr. Tabor was there as a representative of the sympathetic archeological community. Unfortunately, he seemed very passive and disengaged. It would have been really interesting to see at least one or two equally sympathetic (read open-minded) theologians/scholars to balance things out. I don’t know if he has actually weighed in on the find and the various considerations, but Marcus Borg comes to mind or perhaps an adequately credentialed progressive Christian minister. Needless to say, the assembled panel didn’t represent all of Christianity; only the ones who would inevitably disagree with the film and its explorations. Most of their responses were predictable and didn’t add much to the discussion.
To Ted’s credit, I did love the question about scientific discovery throughout history and the Church’s equally history resistance to assimilate that knowledge. Not that I enjoy seeing people put into uncomfortable situations, but given the skewed nature of the program, it was kind of nice to watch the “Pharisees” squirm if just for a second…
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 20:47
A: There's no evidence for an organized coverup, I knew about the various ossuaries some time ago. If its an organized coverup, it must include the thousands of scholars that already knew about some of these boxes. Its more a matter of the fact that scholars require a great deal more rigid development than what was presented here. To, this is the old song and dance, if you come up with a theory and can't get many scholars to agree with you, mass-market to the public, there are a lot of people who won't hold you to the same standards of evidence.
Name:cdonaldson •
Date: 03/05/07 20:57
A: Not sure if you were addressing my point above KRS, but I wasn't insinuating an organized "cover up" of the find from the public but the actual physical covering up of the site with an apartment complex. Was money the key factor in continuing the building project? Are there so many archeological sites in Jerusalem that the possible significance of finds such as this are diminished or not adequately explored?
Name:Tara •
Date: 03/05/07 21:03
A: Would you say that the media is equal in influence on the general public as the leaders in Jesus' time.
i feel like the spin the media has put on this is mocking some very great work. It makes me feel like they are draping it in purple and placing a crown of thorns on its head.
Its sad to read in the bible about the horrible human nature of people that mocked Jesus and stood by and watched him die. Now to read this stuff and watch how nothing in time has changed.
Name:ricoh •
Date: 03/05/07 22:03
A: Shame, shame mr. Ted, so much for your education, your experience, broadmindness, as part of free society open to dialogue, your style and should I go on. It takes years to build reputation but you lost it from this viewer forever. What are your afraid of? What are you afraid of? you know the truth why deny it? Why are your afraid to reason? God created nothing better than reason. Everything has a reason, some we do know some we don't know yet, again yet. for some what's follow will help if they reason, other when they reason it out. Good luck cousins..Surah 19. Mary
1. Kaf. Ha. Ya. 'Ain. Sad.
2. (This is) a recital of the Mercy of thy Lord to His servant Zakariya.
3. Behold! he cried to his Lord in secret,
4. Praying: "O my Lord! infirm indeed are my bones, and the hair of my head doth glisten with grey: but never am I unblest, O my Lord, in my prayer to Thee!
5. "Now I fear (what) my relatives (and colleagues) (will do) after me: but my wife is barren: so give me an heir as from Thyself,-
6. "(One that) will (truly) represent me, and represent the posterity of Jacob; and make him, O my Lord! one with whom Thou art well-pleased!"
7. (His prayer was answered): "O Zakariya! We give thee good news of a son: His name shall be Yahya: on none by that name have We conferred distinction before."
8. He said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son, when my wife is barren and I have grown quite decrepit from old age?"
9. He said: "So (it will be) thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me: I did indeed create thee before, when thou hadst been nothing!'"
10. (Zakariya) said: "O my Lord! give me a Sign." "Thy Sign," was the answer, "Shall be that thou shalt speak to no man for three nights, although thou art not dumb."
11. So Zakariya came out to his people from his chamber: He told them by signs to celebrate Allah.s praises in the morning and in the evening.
12. (To his son came the command): "O Yahya! take hold of the Book with might": and We gave him Wisdom even as a youth,
13. And piety (for all creatures) as from Us, and purity: He was devout,
14. And kind to his parents, and he was not overbearing or rebellious.
15. So Peace on him the day he was born, the day that he dies, and the day that he will be raised up to life (again)!
16. Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East.
17. She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent her our angel, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.
18. She said: "I seek refuge from thee to ((Allah)) Most Gracious: (come not near) if thou dost fear Allah."
19. He said: "Nay, I am only a messenger from thy Lord, (to announce) to thee the gift of a holy son.
20. She said: "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"
21. He said: "So (it will be): Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me: and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us':It is a matter (so) decreed."
22. So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place.
23. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): "Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!"
24. But (a voice) cried to her from beneath the (palm-tree): "Grieve not! for thy Lord hath provided a rivulet beneath thee;
25. "And shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree: It will let fall fresh ripe dates upon thee.
26. "So eat and drink and cool (thine) eye. And if thou dost see any man, say, 'I have vowed a fast to ((Allah)) Most Gracious, and this day will I enter into not talk with any human being'"
27. At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought!
28. "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!"
29. But she pointed to the babe. They said: "How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?"
30. He said: "I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;
31. "And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live;
32. "(He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable;
33. "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"!
34. Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.
35. It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is.
36. Verily Allah is my Lord and your Lord: Him therefore serve ye: this is a Way that is straight.
37. But the sects differ among themselves: and woe to the unbelievers because of the (coming) Judgment of a Momentous Day!
38. How plainly will they see and hear, the Day that they will appear before Us! but the unjust today are in error manifest!
39. But warn them of the Day of Distress, when the matter will be determined: for (behold,) they are negligent and they do not believe!
40. It is We Who will inherit the earth, and all beings thereon: to Us will they all be returned.
41. (Also mention in the Book (the story of) Abraham: He was a man of Truth, a prophet.
42. Behold, he said to his father: "O my father! why worship that which heareth not and seeth not, and can profit thee nothing?
43. "O my father! to me hath come knowledge which hath not reached thee: so follow me: I will guide thee to a way that is even and straight.
44. "O my father! serve not Satan: for Satan is a rebel against ((Allah)) Most Gracious.
45. "O my father! I fear lest a Penalty afflict thee from ((Allah)) Most Gracious, so that thou become to Satan a friend."
46. (The father) replied: "Dost thou hate my gods, O Abraham? If thou forbear not, I will indeed stone thee: Now get away from me for a good long while!"
47. Abraham said: "Peace be on thee: I will pray to my Lord for thy forgiveness: for He is to me Most Gracious.
48. "And I will turn away from you (all) and from those whom ye invoke besides Allah. I will call on my Lord: perhaps, by my prayer to my Lord, I shall be not unblest."
49. When he had turned away from them and from those whom they worshipped besides Allah, We bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and each one of them We made a prophet.
50. And We bestowed of Our Mercy on them, and We granted them lofty honour on the tongue of truth.
51. Also mention in the Book (the story of) Moses: for he was specially chosen, and he was an apostle (and) a prophet.
52. And we called him from the right side of Mount (Sinai), and made him draw near to Us, for mystic (converse).
53. And, out of Our Mercy, We gave him his brother Aaron, (also) a prophet.
54. Also mention in the Book (the story of) Isma'il: He was (strictly) true to what he promised, and he was an apostle (and) a prophet.
55. He used to enjoin on his people Prayer and Charity, and he was most acceptable in the sight of his Lord.
56. Also mention in the Book the case of Idris: He was a man of truth (and sincerity), (and) a prophet:
57. And We raised him to a lofty station.
58. Those were some of the prophets on whom Allah did bestow His Grace,- of the posterity of Adam, and of those who We carried (in the Ark) with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel of those whom We guided and chose. Whenever the Signs of ((Allah)) Most Gracious were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tears.
59. But after them there followed a posterity who missed prayers and followed after lusts soon, then, will they face Destruction,-
60. Except those who repent and believe, and work righteousness: for these will enter the Garden and will not be wronged in the least,-
61. Gardens of Eternity, those which ((Allah)) Most Gracious has promised to His servants in the Unseen: for His promise must (necessarily) come to pass.
62. They will not there hear any vain discourse, but only salutations of Peace: And they will have therein their sustenance, morning and evening.
63. Such is the Garden which We give as an inheritance to those of Our servants who guard against Evil.
64. (The angels say:) "We descend not but by command of thy Lord: to Him belongeth what is before us and what is behind us, and what is between: and thy Lord never doth forget,-
65. "Lord of the heavens and of the earth, and of all that is between them; so worship Him, and be constant and patient in His worship: knowest thou of any who is worthy of the same Name as He?"
66. Man says: "What! When I am dead, shall I then be raised up alive?"
67. But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?
68. So, by thy Lord, without doubt, We shall gather them together, and (also) the Evil Ones (with them); then shall We bring them forth on their knees round about Hell;
69. Then shall We certainly drag out from every sect all those who were worst in obstinate rebellion against ((Allah)) Most Gracious.
70. And certainly We know best those who are most worthy of being burned therein.
71. Not one of you but will pass over it: this is, with thy Lord, a Decree which must be accomplished.
72. But We shall save those who guarded against evil, and We shall leave the wrong-doers therein, (humbled) to their knees.
73. When Our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them, the Unbelievers say to those who believe, "Which of the two sides is best in point of position? Which makes the best show in council?"
74. But how many (countless) generations before them have we destroyed, who were even better in equipment and in glitter to the eye?
75. Say: "If any men go astray, ((Allah)) Most Gracious extends (the rope) to them, until, when they see the warning of Allah (being fulfilled) - either in punishment or in (the approach of) the Hour,- they will at length realise who is worst in position, and (who) weakest in forces!
76. "And Allah doth advance in guidance those who seek guidance: and the things that endure, Good Deeds, are best in the sight of thy Lord, as rewards, and best in respect of (their) eventual return."
77. Hast thou then seen the (sort of) man who rejects Our Signs, yet says: "I shall certainly be given wealth and children?"
78. Has he penetrated to the Unseen, or has he taken a contract with ((Allah)) Most Gracious?
79. Nay! We shall record what he says, and We shall add and add to his punishment.
80. To Us shall return all that he talks of and he shall appear before Us bare and alone.
81. And they have taken (for worship) gods other than Allah, to give them power and glory!
82. Instead, they shall reject their worship, and become adversaries against them.
83. Seest thou not that We have set the Evil Ones on against the unbelievers, to incite them with fury?
84. So make no haste against them, for We but count out to them a (limited) number (of days).
85. The day We shall gather the righteous to ((Allah)) Most Gracious, like a band presented before a king for honours,
86. And We shall drive the sinners to Hell, like thirsty cattle driven down to water,-
87. None shall have the power of intercession, but such a one as has received permission (or promise) from ((Allah)) Most Gracious.
88. They say: "((Allah)) Most Gracious has begotten a son!"
89. Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!
90. At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin,
91. That they should invoke a son for ((Allah)) Most Gracious.
92. For it is not consonant with the majesty of ((Allah)) Most Gracious that He should beget a son.
93. Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to ((Allah)) Most Gracious as a servant.
94. He does take an account of them (all), and hath numbered them (all) exactly.
95. And everyone of them will come to Him singly on the Day of Judgment.
96. On those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, will ((Allah)) Most Gracious bestow love.
97. So have We made the (Qur'an) easy in thine own tongue, that with it thou mayest give Glad Tidings to the righteous, and warnings to people given to contention.
98. But how many (countless) generations before them have We destroyed? Canst thou find a single one of them (now) or hear (so much as) a whisper of them?
Name:StarLight •
Date: 03/06/07 1:55
A: Thank you to the original poster! Everything he said was very true. Ted even was attacking him over being biased when much of Teds style in debate was very biased. For instance his final note saying whether finding the family tomb will take away peoples faith. He try to present it like it wouldn't but thats for every individual to decide. You can't say either way unless its bias.
Name:Lynne57 •
Date: 03/06/07 2:12
A: I totally agree, and felt so bad for James & Simcha!! Ted was way out of line!!
Name:NormDoering •
Date: 03/06/07 12:07
A: Amazingly, to me, none of Simcha Jacobovichi's critics brought up the fact that Jesus' tomb had supposedly been found hundreds of years ago. They built a church on the site called "The Church of the Holy Sepulchre," the "holiest" Christian site in Jerusalem and Israel. It was supposedly built on the location where Christ was crucified and buried. A church originally built by Constantine I the Great in 333 AD, after he supposedly became Christian, and then turned Christianity to the official religion of the Roman empire.
http://normdoering.blogspot.com
Name:hbic3 •
Date: 03/08/07 11:33
A: No YOU sound like Koepell in this injecting YOUR feelings about it into it and being downright fanatical about it.
Name:Red •
Date: 03/08/07 13:50
A: Graham..
The approach to the other ossuaries was a Logical one. The Boxes that did not have Inscriptions do not support nor, do they negate the boxes that do have inscriptions. Yes, the unmarked boxes are evidence of SOMETHING, but this SOMETHING can only be speculated, because there is really no way to know who or what was in them.
So, logically they cant be intered as evidence for , or against the Postulate that the inscripted ones are "family"
The justice system uses this logic all the time.
Now , if we want to speculate about the unmarked boxes, there really is only one logical answer. Being this is a family tomb, the folks in those boxes were probably some relatiion to the family. That is as far as logic can take it.......
