Name:CRosebrough •
Title: The Death of Christianity •
Date posted: 02/27/07 15:36
Q: It doesn't matter what a liberal theologian like John Dominic Crossan says. If this tomb is THE tomb of Jesus of Nazareth then Christianity as we know it is done for.
The Apostle Paul (who claims to be an eye-witness of Jesus’ resurrection) said this, "And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ.” (Corinthians 15:14-15)
Here is the good news. I've done the research on the claims of this film. (they are nothing new) After a carefull analysis of the statistical and DNA proof I can difinitively say that the case put forward by this film and this site are flimsy at best. To see my rebuttal please visit ExtremeTheology.com
Chris Rosebrough
Theologian
Name:Jesus •
Date: 02/27/07 15:49
A: And that’s just your opinion I think we need to see the whole thing before we jump the gun. Have you seen it.?
Name:Tara •
Date: 02/27/07 15:55
A: If you read this as I have been doing for over a day, you will see that they have not suggested that Jesus was not raised. Why could he not have been raised in spirit and not body.
It is such an all or nothing view that it scares me, it was closed minded people who did not want to hear the word of Jesus and it was close minded people that put him to death, there was a crowd of people who could have stopped it and did nothing.
What you quote does not support you arguement, it just shows that you chose to interpret it as you want. Jesus was raised, and the chistian faith still holds strong...only it was in spirit not body.
So once again christianity is not done for!
Name:JesusChild •
Date: 02/27/07 16:03
A: I do not think that Christianity is done for. I think it just means that us Christians have to stand on solid ground. The witness wrote what they saw and I believe everything in the Bible is true.
I just think we have came to the point that we are trying to be force to give up our faith. If you are a true Christian you will stand up against anything. I believe we are starting the early Tribulation and we have to strong in our faith for Satan is testing us! I pray for courage for all of Christians everyday, for we are going to need it.
Name:Jesus •
Date: 02/27/07 16:14
A: RE:I just think we have came to the point that we are trying to be force to give up our faith.
- -
By who ?
- -
RE: If you are a true Christian you will stand up against anything.
- -
So no matter what the evidence or what the suggestion if its not exactly as printed in the Bible it must be false ? that’s bonkers.
Name:Abigail •
Date: 02/27/07 16:25
A: I don't think at all that they are denying the resurrection or ascension. The findings are just being presented as what they are: they found the tomb with the names and confirmed it with DNA, so let's discuss it rationally. One does not rule out the other.
Name:jimmyhambone •
Date: 02/27/07 16:50
A: [i]confirmed it with DNA[/i]
Confirmed what with DNA? That the Jeshua and the Mariamne bones were not related? They didn't confirm squat with regard to the authenticity of their [i]discovery[/i].
Most of the DNA from this period is degraded (just as with the blood on the Shroud of Turin), so....so much for cloning Christ and proving this is his tomb. Too bad they didn't have solid DNA evidence in both cases, then we could compare them both, and draw specific conclusions regarding the evidence.
Name:ollypop •
Date: 02/27/07 17:24
A: What i think everyone is overlooking is regardless of the implications made in this film, and possibly due to them, Jesus is being discussed by more agnostics and athiests then ever before. The death of christianity is not at hand, I believe it is becoming a personal search for the divine and need not follow the doctrine set out by the gospel writers or the bishops who edited the gospel at the many synods held in the two millenia of christianity.
Name:Heather •
Date: 02/27/07 17:27
A: I completely agree with ollypop
Name:Wolter •
Date: 02/27/07 19:26
A: I completely DISagree with ollypop. The original books of the Bible were not "Edited" in any form. Also, your view of the synods as being a vote are misconstrued. It wasn't a vote as in a Democratic Election, it was a vote saying "which of these books come directly from the Apostles, handed down to us in Apostolic Succession". The results were overwhelming, hundreds against an approximate 16, and the very 16 who voted differently were those who were outside of the line of the Apostle Succession all together. If we're going to toss out any reliability of the Gospels due to an entirely Autonomous reason, we should all stop, go home, and stop playing Church.
- Wolter
Theologian
2 Pet. 1:20,21
Name:Tara •
Date: 02/27/07 20:56
A: What are you a theologin of?
Honestly!
Name:Wolter •
Date: 02/27/07 21:02
A: Because you can only insult, it is clear your statement lacks substance. I could easily reply, who do you believe you're a follower of?
Name:ollypop •
Date: 02/27/07 21:15
A: Wolter: I do believe my "faith" has been questioned. 2 Pet. 1:20,21....... While I believe faith to be an enduring and desireable aspect of ones character, I in no way believe that blind faith will deliver anything other than the results of so many past mistakes of the so called "church". If you'd like examples i could give you many, including the first crusade againt the Cathars (Albigensian).....(Chistian VS Christian). If you wish to get in a debate about the Synods held under Constatine I and others like Justinian II well this could be a long and exasperating discussion. I believe that you may side on the Inquisitors and therefore follow the creed "Kill them all, let god sort them out" or something like that lol
Websters dictionary: (SYNOD) -- an assembly of ecclesiastics or other church delegates, convoked pursuant to the LAW!!!! of the church, for the discussion and decision of ecclesiastical AFFAIRS!!!!; ecclesiastical council.
Websters dictionary: (EDITING) -- "To modify or adapt so as to make suitable or acceptable"...
Name:Wolter •
Date: 02/27/07 21:25
A: ollypop, you sound like a person willing to do some research. For the sake of the conversation I used the term synod. It very much applies to the Church Counsels because the Affairs were simply this: Tons of non-Christian teachings tried to come into the Church from outside of the Apostle's teachings. Secondly, the more formal term is Ecumenical Counsel. When you read the Church Fathers (Irenaeus will help you greatly), you will read that the counsels had nothing to do with "voting", but had everything to do with seeing which texts came straight from the Apostles.
Finally, please do not confuse the Roman Catholic Church with the Early Church. The Early Church which held the general Ecumenical Councils precede the Roman Catholic Church by MANY years. The Counsels took place while the Christians were still under oppression by the Roman Catholic Church.
I'll take my leave of this site, as I only came by for today to check out what all the "hoopla" was about.
Take care.
- Wolter
Name:ranthi •
Date: 02/27/07 21:27
A: If your faith is something that can be taken away with a simple documentary then maybe its not as strong as it should be. Christianity is far from dead...religion is far from dead..eastern religions..western religions...all far from dead.
Take the bible for what it is...a story. A true account..a false account..an "edited" account..whatever suits your fancy..of a man who apparently spent his life trying traveling and teaching people a better way to live while giving them a reason TO live.
You dont have to believe in the story..but the message is something that cant be denied. And while there are good people in the world..that message can never die.
Name:ollypop •
Date: 02/27/07 21:52
A: Wolter,
I sincerely hope you don't take your leave from this site.
As I wish to hear an opinion that is unequivably believed by it's defender.
Do you truly believe that only four of the gospels, out of the more that twelve discovered, contain the only truths about the divine?
I will certainly do some MORE "research" but wasnt' the first Ecumenical council held under Constantine? A devout follower of Mithras?
Name:Abigail •
Date: 02/27/07 21:56
A: Maybe this thread should be renamed The Rebirth of Christianity. I feel that this finding has altered my understanding of Jesus, but not undermined my faith in anyway.
Name:tricker •
Date: 02/28/07 0:36
A: If this tomb was the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth, there wouldn't be any remains in it. Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ and is risen bodily from the grave, is in Heaven now, (bones and all) and is coming again. IMHO, this is either a mistake or a fraud. The latter sounds more like it to me and I question the definition of experts. Nothing in the scriptures indicate a spiritual resurrection and everything in the scriptures indicates that He arose physically from the grave. Consider Luke 24: 39, "Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself. Touch me and see: a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have." NIV That's pretty plain. There is no threat to Christianity here as we serve a living God. Physically alive!
Tricker
Name:factfinding •
Date: 02/28/07 0:48
A: The Holy Bible didn't mention about a Jesus-Magnalene relationship because there was no relationship, period. Why don't people focus instead on the true marriage implications found in Revelation 19:6-10?
http://www.youtu-be.com/watch?v=PVzDK0b0MWc-
Name:cthosk1 •
Date: 02/28/07 15:46
A: Ollypop,
I'm not sure about Wolter, but I do truly believe that those four gospels are of much more significance than the others you claim were discovered. I assume you are referring to works such as the Gospel of Thomas which is a Gnostic gospel written nearly 200 years after Christ and other such works. These Gnostic gospels bear little to no resemblance and are no where near as important as the earliest Christian writings (Matthew, Mark, John) which were written by those who actually walked with Jesus and viewed the events taking place first hand.
Name:Inkash •
Date: 02/28/07 19:38
A: The answer is simple and it should give to gnosticism what it deserves and was unfair taken:power!
Christianity simply needs an upgrade,we have been kept in the dark for too long and why?Because church had too much power through THEIR understanding of the holy teachings.They`re about to lose it soon if not this time!I just hope they`ll lose it peacefuly even though i doubt so much power could simply be lost without bad implications
Name:ollypop •
Date: 02/28/07 20:19
A: cthosk,
John is the only gospel with a possibility of being written by it's namesake, the others have been credited to followers of their namesakes.
And regardless why must so many Christian's believe in the all or nothing stance portrayed by the organized church?
Many have found Christ without believing in the Doctrine of a corrupt organization such as the Roman Catholic Church.
Jesus would be ashamed!
Name:MWAnderson •
Date: 02/28/07 23:01
A: I apologize in advance--I'm not out for a fight here--but the "Theology" being put forth by the "Theologians" that have posted so far does not ring true, and I fear that I'm skeptical of such claims.
1) It has been a while, but I do not believe that Paul in any way claims to have witnessed the resurrection--since he came to Christianity after Jesus' death on the cross, that would be a logical conclusion. If I am wrong, please feel free to post the verses that refute my assertion.
2) From all that I've seen, heard & read, most theologians agree that likely NONE of the gospels were written by first generation Christians. Again, I'm completely open to being enlightened by a quote from a reputable source.
And, I must agree with Inkash--from a POV of individuals seeking spiritual sources and enlightenment that circumvents traditional religion, the Gnostic take on Jesus, coupled with information that could realign and/or open up new avenues of thought concerning Jesus, is compelling in nature.
Name:Brother Mark Burton •
Date: 03/01/07 0:16
A: Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty.
Holiness is God's religion not Christianity! Therefore, Christianity is a dead and lifeless religion of Satan and hypocrites of which those that follow her shall split hell wide open in eternity.
Holiness is the religion of Almighty God.
Peace be unto thee!
Thine in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty,
Brother Mark Burton
Church website: http://www.truthofGod.com
Name:Kerry •
Date: 03/01/07 3:19
A: The fact of the matter is that christianity as we know it is not done for. There is no way to prove beyond all doubt (I didn't say reasonable doubt) that this is the Jesus (the Christ) Family Tomb.
It is impossible for anyone living today to say beyond all doubt that the scriptures weren't edited.
Let's face it. A crumbling Roman government looking for another avenue to control the world would have stopped short of nothing to maintain control.
This statement is not meant to judge or condemn the Roman church as it exists today, unless there are documents held by the Vatican that could shed "truth" on this subject; but are being withheld.
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/01/07 13:59
A: The Apostle Paul? Which, Paul of Tarsus? If you are referring to him then you better do some reesearch. Paul of Tarsus didn't even exist during the life time of Jesus. Meaning he was not even born yet.
The First letters of Paul to the Corinthians are attributed to Paul of Tarsus who was a Jew who admitted to condemning Christians to prison and death before he saw his vision of Christ while traveling on the road to Damascus.
He was not an eye witness to Christs death.
Read your bible.
So if you want to convince people you might want to at least use a true eye witness.
Like Mary Magdelene.
Peace
SW
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/01/07 14:14
A: MWAnderson;
You are completely correct in your statement of when the Gospels were written and by whom if the authors names have not changed over the many hundreds of years.
None of the writers of original manuscripts of the Gospels can be dated to the time of Jesus, and that being said nor can the authors be authenticated to those of the original apostles as it was common practice among the ancient theologians to plagerize as there were no laws to protect original authorship.
So yes to blindly follow without acknowledging what we know by proof of the pudding is indeed misleading.
Even Jesus warned us about what would occur. Trust him.
Peace
SW
Name:drg3750 •
Date: 03/01/07 18:59
A: Is Christianity finished? Of course not! No one will EVER prove that this is the tomb of Jesus and Mary. The established church will never accept it, and there is no definitive yes or no answer to be had. The discovery makes two groups of people intensely unhappy: First, the fundamentalists, who can't even consider the possibility that that Jesus' body did not remain in the tomb, and that the resurrection was a spiritual event. Second, those mythicists who deny that there ever was an historical Jesus. Now at last there is some SHRED of evidence to the contrary that cannot be refuted. Even though it is not definitive proof, it cannot be ruled out either. Established Christianity will of course not recognize it. Established Christianity is not capable of making any change at all. It is petrified. However, thoughtful inquisitive people who are genuinely seeking the truth will possibly find this as sufficient reason to at least believe that there really WAS a real historical person behind the myth.
Name:Patty •
Date: 03/01/07 19:14
A: Have you actually seen the film?
Patty
Name:cduckett •
Date: 03/01/07 19:54
A: It never fails to amaze me that folks will believe in the supernatural and magic (miraculous healings, walking on water, resurrection, ascension, etc) and call it "historical," go on to call any other world religion mere "myth," and then consider it "unbelievable" when a tomb is found. What would unbiased and objective analysis determine about such things? Are supernatural/magical/miraculous accounts "historical" or do they only exist with the artificial constructs of language (words)? Can we point to God, Heaven, Hell, the Soul, Eternal Life, Angels, Devils, etc., or are we able only to point to the word "God," the word "Heaven," the word "Hell," etc? Do words make reality, or is reality what you have after you remove the words? Would anyone find any reason to believe any religious claims outside of language? I think not. Religion is impossible without language, but reality is not. The next time somebody makes a claim that is purely supernatural, ask whether they obtained this 'knowledge' from reality itself or only because of words. So, ultimately, which is more unbelievable? That a tomb was found or that a supernatural man-god ascended into Heaven bones and all? Finally, for those who don't know any better: the Apostle Paul never claimed to have been an eye-witness of Jesus' resurrection, and the so-called 'Eyewitnesses' who composed the Four Gospels were actually composed in the third-person by authors unknown. The names Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were tacked on decades after the fact to give these third-person anonymous accounts a feel of supernatural legitimacy. Would any of us today believe an anonymous third-person account that claimed supernatural occurrences in comparison to how we know the world works?
Name:polska •
Date: 03/01/07 21:46
A: cduckett, so according to you anything that you can see "reality" is more believable then "unseen"? You say that Religion is impossible without language but reality is not? what do you mean by reality? everything seen by your eyes? can you call math a language? many things are impossible to explain unless we use mathematics. You can`t see Universe so should you say that since it is not "reality" cause most of it is explained only by math(language) you don`t believe in it?
Name:jph424 •
Date: 03/01/07 23:48
A: Please read the Washington Post article about the film before you watch this obviously biased viewpoint.
A: Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty. Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.
Christianity is a religion of devils, for it is not a religion of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty. Holiness is Jesus Christ's religion.
Peace be unto thee!
Thine in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty,
Brother Mark Burton
Church website: http://www.truthofGod.com
Name:Lore •
Date: 03/02/07 3:08
A: Wolter wrote: "Secondly, the more formal term is Ecumenical Counsel. When you read the Church Fathers (Irenaeus will help you greatly)"
Irenaeus disagreed with the gospels about Yeshua's death.
http://www.xenos.org/-essays/sejanus.htm
"Tiberius- became emperor on September 17, 14 CE. Pilate was removed from office to appear immediately before Tiberius, but Tiberius died while Pilate was en route. Tiberius died on March 16, 37 CE. Therefore, Pilate was removed no later than late 36 CE.
"The fact that Sejanus's downfall came in 31 CE has a very significant impact on dating the death of Jesus. Only 30 or 33 CE are tenable years for Jesus' death. Pilate was probably Sejanus' appointee who actively carried out his anti-semitic policies, and thus was in danger after Sejanus was executed. The behavior of Pilate and the Jews during the trial of Jesus makes sense only after Sejanus' demise. Therefore, 33 CE is the preferable date for the death of Jesus."
*****
2nd century bishop Irenaeus disagreed: "They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written, 'to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,' maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month.... from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify.... And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan."
Irenaeus again: "The Thirty aeons are not typified by the fact that Christ was baptized in his 30th year: He did not suffer in the twelfth month after his baptism, but was more than fifty years old when he died." - Against Heresies, II, 22.
So Ireneasus denied his death at 33, which is the only time that Pilate could have put Yeshu to death. Thus, he denied the crucifixion. Irenaeus also said he lived to be at least the age of fifty, but then also speaks of Yeshu attaining old age up to the times of Trahan, who began to rule in 98 CE. That means that Yeshu lived to (at least) the age of 98 by Dionysis's calculation. But we know he erred (oops, since the word "err" in the Bible was mistranslated as "sin," perhaps I should say "Dionysis sinned'). Dionysis's calculation was off by at least 5 years. Correcting that error/sin would make Yeshu at least 104 at his death, according to Irenaeus.
Name:Dean Edward •
Date: 03/02/07 3:47
A: The initial assertion that there is any clear claim by Paul to have seen the ressurection is a false one. Paul only "claimed" to have seen a vision of something he thought was this "christ"....and even the men that travelled with Paul could not bear witness to what he had experienced. Making claims like this puts the onus on you and others to provide your sources that you use to back you assertions. Theologian? I wonder.
Name:BlessedChildofGod333 •
Date: 03/02/07 10:36
A: OK..... PLEASE TELL ME YOU ARE KIDDING?
YOUR SIGNATURE SAYS THEOLOGIAN, BUT I BELIEVE YOU NEED TO STUDY THAT SUBJECT A LITTLE FURTHER BUDDY.....
CAN WE PLEASE DEAL WITH THE FACTS OF THE SITUATION?
First, The Apostle Paul was a witness to the RESURRECTED BODY OF JESUS..... not to THE resurrection.
THERE WAS NO WITNESS TO THE RESURRECTION ITSELF.
BY THE WAY, IT WAS MARY FROM MAGDALENE WHO WAS FIRST TO DISCOVER THE EMPTY TOMB AND SEE THE RESURRECTED BODY OF CHRIST==
SHE IS IMPORTANT- MORE THAN THE BIBLE REVEALS--
The bible talks about the RESURRECTED BODY OF CHRIST being viewed by many. \\//
STOP FOCUSING ON THE BONES FOUND IN THE BOX.
THESE ARE THE FACTS THAT THE MOVIE PRESENTS
THERE WAS A TOMB FOUND IN 1980 ***
THERE WERE 10 REPORTED OSSUARIES FOUND ***
THERE WERE ONLY 9 DELIVERED TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES ***
THERE WAS A OSSUARY CLAIMING TO BE THE BROTHER OF JESUS FOUND LATER AND THEN DISCOUNTED == BUT IS CURRENTLY BEING INVESTIGATED BECAUSE IT FITS THE DESCRIPTION OF THE MISSING ONE DESCRIBED AS ABOVE. & THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SHOWS THE SAME MATERIAL ON THIS BOX AS THE OTHERS FOUND IN THE SAME TOMB *** YES.... *** SCIENCE PEOPLE ***
THE BROTHER JAMES OSSUARY SPARKS A FURTHER INVESTIGATION INTO THE POSSIBILITY THERE WAS A TOMB WITH OTHERS THAT HAD BEEN FOUND.
THE DISCOVERY OF THE UNUSUAL CLUSTER OF NAMES LISTED ON OSSUARIES FOUND IN A TOMB TOGETHER PROMPTED THIS ENTIRE THING.
THERE IS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT THE BROTHER JAMES BONE BOX IS INDEED THE MISSING BOX AND
BECAUSE OF THIS THE CLUSTER HOLDS MORE IMPORTANCE.
THE OSSUARIES HAVE UNUSUAL NAMES AND DESCRIPTIONS, WITH THE ADDITION OF A JUDAH SON OF JESUS BOX
PEOPLE.... THIS ISN'T A BIG PUBLICITY STUNT.....
THIS IS AN HONEST DISCOVERY.
THESE PEOPLE DIDN'T FIND THIS AND MAKE IT UP.
WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WANTS THIS KIND OF NEGATIVE ATTENTION. DON'T YOU THINK THESE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE KNEW THAT THE WORLD WOULD FREAK OUT?
LETS DEAL WITH FACTS.....OK
NOW HERE IS THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH CLAIMING JESUS' BONES HAVE BEEN FOUND.
THE ONLY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE DONE SO FAR WAS WITH THE BONE BOX RESIDUE ON 2 OSSUARIES.
THESE DNA TESTS DO NOT CONFIRM OR DENY THE IDENTITY OF THESE BONES -- NORE DOES IT ANSWER ANY DNA QUESTIONS EXCEPT IT SHOWS THE SAMPLE TAKEN FROM JESUS' BONES BOX DIDN'T HAVE THE SAME MOTHER AS THE SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE MARY MAGDALENE BONE BOX.
PLEASE TAKE THE FACTS AND STOP RUNNING AWAY WITH YOUR IMAGINATIONS.
THE BIGGEST FACTOR IN THIS FOR ME IS THE TOMB
THIS IS NOT RIGHT
THIS IS NOT NORMAL
THIS IS NOT JEWISH TRADITION TO HAVE SKULLS INSIDE THE CHAMBER. THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE VERY BIG ON THE RESPECT OF THE DEAD. THIS IS VERY, VERY SPECIAL
THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SKULLS FOUND IN THE TOMB NEEDS TO REMIND ALL OF US THAT THIS TOMB WAS ENTERED AND CONTAMINATED SOMETIME BETWEEN THE TIME OF JESUS AND NOW.
THE OTHER FACT THAT CAN NOT BE IGNORED IS THE SPECIAL BOX OF MARIAMNE. BUT I HAVE PROBLEMS WITH ITS SIZE. THEY SAY THEY OSSUARIES ARE MADE TO FIT THE LARGEST BONE TO BE PLACED IN THE BOX. BUT THE FEMALES BOX IS BIGGER. THAT IS A QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
BUT AGAIN - I WILL REPEAT THIS UNTIL IT'S BEEN DONE ===
I urge caution about making any assumptions about the relationships of these people and their identities until further DNA evidence can be collected from each bone box and hopefully from the bones themselves.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU CAN REMEMBER IS THE SKULLS THAT WERE FOUND IN THE TOMB WITH THE OSSUARIES ARE NOT FROM THE FIRST CENTURY.
THESE BOXES HAVE BEEN TAMPERED WITH AND POSSIBLY CONTAMINATED WITH THE REMAINS OF OTHERS. THE BONES HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED, CATEGORIZED OR EVEN EXAMINED PROPERLY.
*****THERE WAS A SHORT COMMENT AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE ABOUT THE FACT THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE HUMAN REMAINS IN AT LEAST ONE OF THESE OSSUARIES.***** (PLEASE RESEARCH THIS FURTHER)
THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED
It is extremely dangerous to say that this is the same JESUS
box and the remains of "THE JESUS OF NAZARETH"
without first taking the DNA sample from Ossuary 80/505 -- “Maria” ,
the MOTHER MARY box and DNA matching it for maternal positive ID
too Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef” – “Jesus, Son of Joseph”
Now when that information comes to light, then you will have a much
clearer picture of the family connection within the tomb.
This also needs to be done with ALL the ossuaries
and bones (if possible) so that any samples can be preserved,
tested and FULLY DNA IDENTIFIED.
Of course this goes without saying that DNA parental identification
needs to be established with the Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef”
– “Jesus, Son of Joseph” and the Ossuary 80/500:
“Mariamene e Mara” – “Mariamne, also called Master”
with regard to the possible child
Ossuary 80/501: “Yehuda bar Yeshua” – “Judah, son of Jesus”
Also, on a side note, you need to address the interestingly strange sequence of events that cause the "emotionally driven" GLOBAL stock market to suddenly make an "unusually market correction" (down over 400 points) when the announcement of a "JESUS FAMILY TOMB" press conference reverberated around the world. And then when the Documentary was denounced "by authorities) then all was right with the market again....Look at the timing.... I did and it was interesting, Coincidence.... maybe.
All of this bears more investigation with an open mind. Asking for God in Heaven to give you discernment and wisdom is always a good idea, because He will answer.
Name:Taylor Williams •
Date: 03/02/07 19:27
A: This finding should be uplifting to people all over the world.... How could something like this destroy Christianity? Show me a place in the Bible that says that Jesus' original human body was resurrected. The Gardener was the one who turned out to be Christ did not look like Jesus. Mary Magdalene (a woman who followed Christ throughout most of his ministry did not even recognize him. What she finally recognized was his spirit. This is how all of us will be recognized in the afterlife... the Bible states over and over again that what we hold dear here in the physical realm cannot be taken into heaven....including our bodies...."we came from dust and to dust so shall we return." These findings could be the greatest archaeological findings ever. Proving the historical accuracy of the gospels sheds new light on all of the books of the bible. Maybe they have really found the tomb of the greatest man/ prophet/ example that has ever walked the earth.
Name:roy •
Date: 03/04/07 16:48
A: I wrote from Istanbul Turkey.
Referring your topic related to James Cameron’s new documentary about Jesus Christ. I describe my ideas as the following;
Jesus was a human being who was created resembling creation as Adam, made as God‘s speacial envoy and word. He was subject to death and resurrection as all other humans at the dooms day.[3:59]
He was not killed or crucified but the scenery was recepted as if he was crucified. In reality, he was never hanged, the person who hanged was resembled to him in the views of the enemy Israelites.[4:157,158]
He was not killed by enemies but survived till the natural death. [19:33]God has taken his life. They were not defeated by the enemies but on the contrary him and his supporter disciples and israelites defeated the enemies.[61:14]
These are the statements written 1430 years ago by Quran. It is believed by heart by billions of muslims, as a prerequisite to be accepted into Islam. Maybe out of bias, or fear of sameness they prefer to ignore what is claimed. It is surprising that modern world is barely aware of this fact or they blind their eyes with superstition. Christ, he disciples and his followers were also muslims who were ordered with salat (prayer) and zekat ( voluntary wealth distribution).
The views above is supported with the related verses of Quran as below. Some of the ideas has been tought by various western writers,which are noted as well.
You may further make your research in english Quran at the link below.
For example ; word of “Christ” I found this link: http://www.kuranmeali.com/arama.asp?kelim-e=Christ&meal=yusufali&sure=hepsi
word- of “Jesus” I found this link:
http://www.kuranmeali.com/arama.asp?ke-lime=jesus&meal=yusufali&sure=hepsi
Sura- - 4 Women (Al-Nesaa')
[4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain,
[4:158] Instead, GOD raised him to Him; GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.
[4:159] Everyone among the people of the scripture was required to believe in him before his death. On the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.
[4:171] O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, "Trinity." You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. GOD suffices as Lord and Master.
Sura - 19 Mary (Maryam)
[19:33] And peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I get resurrected."
[19:34] That was Jesus, the son of Mary, and this is the truth of this matter, about which they continue to doubt.
[19:35] It does not befit GOD that He begets a son, be He glorified. To have anything done, He simply says to it, "Be," and it is.
[19:36] He also proclaimed, "GOD is my Lord and your Lord; you shall worship Him alone. This is the right path."
*19:36 This is similar to the statement attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John 20:17.
Sura - 5 The Feast (Al-Ma'edah)
[5:72] Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah himself said, "O Children of Israel, you shall worship GOD; my Lord and your Lord." Anyone who sets up any idol beside GOD, GOD has forbidden Paradise for him, and his destiny is Hell. The wicked have no helpers.
*Look at the sameness of Kuran: Sura - 5 ( The Feast ) Al-Ma'edah and Bible Matta 7:21-23
*5:72-76 In John 20:17, we see that Jesus taught that he was neither God, nor the son of God. Many theologians have concluded, after careful research, that today's Christianity is not the same Christianity taught by Jesus. Two outstanding books on this subject are "The Myth of God Incarnate" (The Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1977) and The "Mythmaker" (Harper & Row, New York, 1986). On the front jacket of "The Mythmaker" we read the following statement:
" ...Hyam Maccoby presents new arguments to support the view that Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity....it was Paul alone who created a new religion through his vision of Jesus as a divine Saviour who died to save humanity."
Sura - 3 The Amramites ( Ali-'Imran)
[3:55] Thus, GOD said, "O Jesus, I am terminating your life, raising you to Me, and ridding you of the disbelievers. I will exalt those who follow you above those who disbelieve, till the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is the ultimate destiny of all of you, then I will judge among you regarding your disputes.
[3:59] The example of Jesus, as far as GOD is concerned, is the same as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be," and he was.
[3:60] This is the truth from your Lord; do not harbor any doubts.
Sura - 61 The Column (Al-Suff)
[61:6] Recall that Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O Children of Israel, I am GOD's messenger to you, confirming the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be even more praised (Ahmad)." Then, when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, "This is profound magic."
*Sameness of Sura - 61 The Column (Al-Suff) and Bible İsiah 45:21,22
Psalm 99:9 Timothy 1:17 good news fro sneding another prophet called Ahmad(Hz Mohammad) or Pheraklid (praised)= Ahmad
[61:14] O you who believe, be GOD's supporters, like the disciples of Jesus, son of Mary. When he said to them, "Who are my supporters towards GOD," they said, "We are GOD's supporters." Thus, a group from the Children of Israel believed, and another group disbelieved. We helped those who believed against their enemy, until they won.
Sura - 3 The Amramites ( Ali-'Imran)
[3:51] "GOD is my Lord and your Lord; you shall worship Him alone. This is the right path."
[3:52] When Jesus sensed their disbelief, he said, "Who are my supporters towards GOD?" The disciples said, "We are GOD's supporters; we believe in GOD, and bear witness that we are submitters / muslims."
*3:51 This is precisely what Jesus is quoted to say throughout the New Testament. See for example the Gospel of John 20:17, and the book "Jesus: Myths and Message" by Lisa Spray, Ch. 4 (Universal Unity, Fremont, CA 1992).
Name:jbowen •
Date: 03/05/07 4:31
A: I have not seen the movie but I would like to a make a few comments. I don't plan on following up or debating this topic but I would like to provide a little information that I truly believe.
I believe Jesus Christ was resurrected as it was spoken of in the NT.
1 Cor. 15:20-22
"20 But now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man cam death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."
I also believe others have been resurrected as it is spoken of in
Matt 27:52
"52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose."
It should be noted that saints is not capitalized. I believe these we common good people not Saints as in the NT St. John etc but ordinary righteous men and women although I believe some we mighty men possibly prophets of old like Jeremiah or Noah, that the Lord some how passed upon the affects of his resurrection to them.
I believe the Lord appeared to several witnesses:
Mark 16:9
"Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalen.."
The book of Luke cites Simon (Luke 34:35)
1 Corinthians Chap. 15:5 mentions... "...he was seen of Cephas."
I also believe that he had a body of flesh and bones as revealed in Luke chapter 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
He... "... appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat..." Mark 16:14
In addition others have seen him
As Paul describes in his first epistle to the Corinthians 15:6-8
6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
In addition I also believe others have seen the resurrected Lord. I not only have the NT to bear witness of Christ but I have another Testament of Christ: The Book of Mormon.
Joseph Smith saw the resurrected Lord. In the Doctrine and Covenants Section 76:19-23 Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon while pondering the resurrection saw and wrote the following:
19 "And while we meditated upon these things, the Lord touched the eyes of our understandings and they were opened, and the glory of the Lord shone round about.
20 And we beheld the glory of the Son, on the bright hand of the Father, and received of his fulness;
21 And saw the holy angels, and them who are sanctified before his throne, worshiping God, and the Lamb, who worship him forever and ever.
22 And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives!
23 For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father— "
The world may view these comments and citations and plead ignorance and refute what I believe but I truly believe these things. I have felt in my soul that these things are true. Jesus Christ is my savior and redeemer. In conclusion of this I give you Christ's own words which gives me comfort "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me. "
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 7:28
A: Honestly, its hard to know where to start on this, (and I couldn't have finished). There is a lot here that is being shuffled off as fact that is actually supposition. I'll try to seperate out some actual facts to aid in the discussion. My conclusions, logic or asides will be in parenthesis.
It has never been proven or disproven as to whether those who were named as the authors of the gospels were actually the authors or not - conclusions to the contrary are no more scientific than conclusions in favor of the position. (The left tends to argue that the early Church accepted writings under someone else's name, however, there is no actual evidence of this, and Paul made some efforts to prevent this from happening. The only clear case of Pseudonymity [writing under a pen name] by a member of the orthodox Christian community in the second century led to the authors excommunication).
The theological left is as biased, and ideologically driven as the theological right.
Conservatives date the synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, to AD 50-60, and John to about AD 80, most of the theological left moves the dates about twenty years later. The author of John claims to be an eye-witness in 21:24-25 to the resurrection and Luke states that he has thoroughly researched the matter out, though he was not, himself an eyewitness. A major archeologist, who began with unbelieving conclusions, has looked at Luke's other book, the book of Acts, and proven that Luke gets details right that the second century historians universally got wrong, and indicated that this degree of accuracy makes him a first rate historian.
The Gnostic gospels were probably written significantly later, they are dated by most scholars to the late second or early third centuries, (most scholars, left or right tend to assume therefore, that they are not useful in studying the actual life of Jesus, but there are a few extreme radicals who disagree on the point). What the Nag Hammadi texts has proven is that the second century did not misquote the gnostics, anything more is pure supposition.
Paul did exist at the time of Christ, and may have seen the crucifixion; he claims to have seen the risen Christ. He connected this with the resurrection appearances of Christ to the other apostles in 1 Cor 15:3-11.
To challange the bodily resurrection is to challange Christianity - this is simply a point of intellectual honesty. Any system of thought or belief has certain irreducible minimums, one of those for Christianity is the bodily resurrection of Christ.
My own Supposition and conclusions: The film is far from proving its point. As someone who has worked in the depths of the New Testament facts and details, I am not impressed by their case, at all. One of their major legs seems to be built on a textual error (noted earlier) and they are using sources somewhat uncritically. In addition, they make several outright errors (such as supposing there is no archeological evidence that Peter died in Rome, actually, they have a second century grave marker under St. Peter's Basilica; while this isn't as strong as some might desire, considering that a first century marker would not be able to stand in the open it is as much as would be possible).
Name:Inner Spirit •
Date: 03/05/07 8:45
A: I want to thank roy for taking the time to post text from his beliefs; I personally find it very refreshing. I find it very dis hearting at times how often I meet a "Christian" and they have absolutely no room for open mindedness on the insight for another religion. Even perhaps those that may be older than the Christian religion.
I also wish to comment to the person who said that Jesus could not be a husband or father because it was not in the bible or that it was not in the bible because he was not those things. How on earth could you make such a foolish statement? You were not there, you do not know, you are not an authority. I have read at one point that it was custom that a married man in that age and culture was to wear facial hair; am I mistaken or has Jesus not been described as to having facial hair and in every depiction he has some form of facial hair. Lets say for argument that I am mistaken and that plays no significance- why can't he have a wife and child. Can a man of spirituality live his life in a good and just way but also share his life and spiritual virtues with another soul and teach those values to a child.
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/05/07 14:19
A: Greetings KRS,
You had me hooked on your post til you said Paul lived during the time of Jesus.
This just showed me that your "opinion of theological speculation" (because that's all it is) is clearly a waste of time.
Peace.
SW
Read your bible.
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 14:37
A: SW you might want to check your sources, and the math. Paul's earliest letters were written in either AD 49 (16 years after the crucificion) or AD 50-51 (depending on the proper dating for Galatians, I date it to 49 a few others to 53-56 on what I believe is bad data from second century historians), so unless he was under twenty years old when he wrote those letters, he was alive in the time of Christ. Jesus probably died in AD 33. Considering the amount of time a Rabbinical education took, and the timeline Paul gives us in Galatians, it is highly probable that he was in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' death, though he no where states he was an eyewitness to the death of Christ.
Name:SpiritWoman •
Date: 03/05/07 14:39
A: Greetings Inner Spirit,
The convenience to the patrilineal power of the church as well as the fallable evidence to the contrary is evidence enough.
Meaning; the church fathers are propping up a man (Jesus) as G_D in the flesh and without earthly response as in Love, knowledge, intellectualism, without ego, without an acknowledgement of the commandments of His G_D to be fruitful and multiply. It doen't smell right to me as well.
Especially when they themselves deny this activity and in retrospect commit crimes against thier parishners.
Adultery, petafiles, homosexuality, baby killings, murder have plagued the christian churches ministery for centuries. Is this punishment for it's lies?
I have searched for a church where anyone of these do not blight it's message and can find none that faces it's own truth.
It was and always has been the duty of the Hebrew to marry and have children as is the first commandment of G_D. And so was the duty of the Rabis.
What would you think of a man who directly went against a commandment of His G_D. Would you call him Christ?
In my eyes, it would be an respected duty of Christ to follow the very first commandment of His G_D. Else he would not be Christ.
Peace
SW
Name:Inner Spirit •
Date: 03/05/07 21:34
A: Greetings SpiritWoman,
I like you! I could not agree with you more on this point. It is so refreshing to see someone else posting who has what I can tell a similar view.
Slightly unrelated- I was reflecting this morning and thinking of my own spiritual journey to date and I was remembering that as a child my parents took my to youth groups for church and I always had a problem with the idea of the trine. How could Jesus also be God. Yet; I remember a vivid discuss I had were it was determined that we are all apart of God and we have the power to create what we seek; in which God perhaps gave us a divine gift if you will to create our own destiny.
I find it very upsetting that in this day and age it seems that more and more people I meet who claim to be Christians are so closed minded to any spiritual idea that does not follow into the bible. To me it almost seems contrary to the belief structior of the Christian church; I thought we were suppose to live by the golden rule and also god gave us the ability to think for ourselves. Of course I know many Christians who are also very open minded as well, but lately it seems like I have not encountered those individuals.
I know a number of people who are good and just and live very faithful lives and are not just a Sunday Christian (meaning- they live their life like that every day and treat everyone with kindness and respect). However, sadly, my husband and I own a computer company and when work is being done on a computer; say for example we are doing a data backup, you have to look at some files to ensure that they are not corrupted files, or if the system has spyware; frequently you will see a corolation to where the spyware comes from. Being in our place of business for as long as we have; we have seen a lot of things. We have found that many and I mean many of the Christians who walk out saying God be with you- have the most porn you will ever see on a computer. Ministers as well, sadly. I am tired of the hypecrites who claim to live by the bible but then beat their wife when they get home from work, or go to church each Sunday, but then flip you off in the parking lot so they can get back to their precious foot ball game on the tv.
When did being spiritual turn into an ugly thing. I've met some who outwardly express that because I am not a Christian I am not as good as they are and that my beliefs are not valid. So would this person then say that Ron who is Muslim has the wrong views or Justin who is Jewish is wrong.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't each of the primary religions teach the same general rule, but perhaps uses different words and stories to give examples of how to live those virtues?
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 21:52
A: Actually, your ideas and Christianity cannot both be true, since they are both mutually exclusive, and to accept both requires us to argue that the first law of logic doesn't apply to God.
As to being inferior or superior, you either have poor representative or haven't fully understood the gospel. One of the central truths of Christianity is that man is total depraved, innately evil, of little good or value. That includes Christian as well as non-Christian; Christians are no better than others, we are made of the same foul stuff as everyone else. The difference between a Christian and a non-believer is that we have trust Christ to save us precisely because we are undeserving of God's favor.
Name:garysmplsmn •
Date: 03/05/07 22:18
A: If the Jesus tomb discoveries and Feuerverger’s statistical analysis are reasonably validated over time, it should at a minimum challenge the Roman Catholic version of Christian orthodoxy. Given what the Catholic hierarchy has done over the centuries to impose their version of orthodoxy, I say Hallelujah! I read through the letter of James yesterday and did not come across a single reference to the resurrection. As a Judeo Christian would, he refers to “the coming of the Lord” – an event which the prophet Isaiah also seems to have spoken of – but does not attach the name Jesus at that point. Paul claimed to have met the risen Jesus, not to have witnessed the resurrection itself. Later in 1Corinthians 15, he says at vs. 42: “So it is with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable.” And again, in verse 50, he says: “What I am saying, brothers and sisters, is this: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.”
As 1Cor. 15 is the most complete statement on the resurrection of the dead in the New Testament, I’m not sure anyone can say that Paul, or any of the original disciples, believed in a resurrection of the earthly body – of Jesus or anyone else. Christian theology evolved over centuries. “The faith” embodied in the Apostles’ creed and other creeds was the work of an emerging human institution. It was not written with the finger of God. For that institution to have asserted virtual equality with God, so far as other humans are concerned, is a blasphemous grab for power which Jesus himself demurred from (Phillipians 2:5-8).
While Paul had not met Jesus in “real time,” he went ahead and wrote much of what became the foundation of “orthodox” Christian theology. I’m not sure he should have done that. Clearly, he borrowed ideas from outside Judaism and transformed Judaism into a universal faith – something that neither Jesus (Matt. 15:24) nor most of his original disciples had any intention of doing. Just as it was human beings who delineated the canon and doctrinal orthodoxy in the past, humans may and probably will revise doctrine into the future. It is likely that those most devoted to traditional orthodoxy will shut their eyes and ears to new discoveries and interpretations, but others will likely develop a new understanding of Christianity – one weighted less with miracles and eschatological speculation and more with basic biblical morality like “love your neighbor as yourself” – and that “reformed” Christianity, drawing on Jewish scripture and such radical texts as the Jefferson bible, may well draw many into its ranks who would have nothing to do with the traditional church.
As to whether Jesus really was God’s son or messiah, I really can’t say. But, given the extremely spotty record of who have carried that assertion through history, I don’t think that maintaining it has much value for humanity. The gospels suggest that Jesus did often see himself as the son of “man” or of his “father in heaven.” But, it seems that he spent most of his time preaching not himself, but a God whose morality is expounded quite well in the letter of his brother James. I urge everyone to read it.
Name:guahould •
Date: 03/06/07 0:24
A: Who cares if he was raised?? spirit ,, body ,, or otherwise!!!!! This is a good documentary and should be a welcome thing for any christian to have even part of their belief to be proven!!!
Name:Rachmaninoff •
Date: 03/06/07 0:49
A: Even if the evidence was not as flimsy, some things simply are not logical: Why would Paul, Peter, and all the other Apostles put their lives on the line and even suffer death for a lie. They could not argue Christ risen when Jewish leaders could simply point at the tomb and say, "there are His bones!"
Additionally, why would the "family" tomb of Christ be located in Jeruselem when both He and His family were from Nazareth - born in Bethlehem. The family had no ties to Jeruselem except that is where Jesus was crucified.
Name:roy •
Date: 03/06/07 18:32
A: Greetings Inner Spirit and all audience.
I think this paragraph is geared to high souls like you from Quran. It is a compliment for what you said ” …his beliefs; I personally find it very refreshing.”
13 AL RA`D (The Thunder). 36
We as muslims does NOT claim ‘ we are sole candidates for paradise and only muslims entitled to go there ~ all the other believers will go to hell’. On the contrary the Quran says paradise wil be filled with mostly from the previous devotees and less from the latters. That means those people who deserve heaven are from Prophets Adam…, Abrahams’ religion ~jewish, christians ect..~ whom we believe they were also on path of islam. Catholics belive only they are the “good citizens” of paradise!
(56 AL WAQI`AH (The Inevitable) 1- 14),
(2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 136)
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 62
Secondly all the faith devotees will be valued on basis of their belief (not up to Quranic verses). It is even urged that others (jewish for example) must keep their faith if they choose to and seek its rules closely.
62 AL JUMU`AH (Friday). 5
5 AL MA'IDAH (The Repast). 48
16 AL NAHL (The Bees). 93
22 AL HAJJ (The Pilgrimage). 67
However God strongly forbids paradise; anyone who claims Christ or any partner share to His Throne. Hundreds of verses written on this topic only because of people have diverted from the true path. Early Christians have changed the Bible according to power hungry Byzantene ruler & bishops wishes at year around 300 AD. The hypothesis and proof of Christ created fatherless but to be a mere human being is very important to us from this point. Quran persistently renounces the notion of “Trias” and defines it as the only unforgivable sin could be made to Him.
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 213
3 AL `IMRAN (The Family of `Imran). 19
Finally I agree strongly as you said ~each of the primary religions teach the same general rule, but perhaps uses different words and stories to give examples of how to live those virtues~ congradulations for your comments.
SUPPORTING QURANIC VERSES MENTIONED ABOVE;
13 AL RA`D (The Thunder). 36 Those unto whom We gave the Scripture rejoice in that which is revealed unto thee. And of the clans there are who deny some of it. Say: I am commanded only that I serve Allah and ascribe unto Him no partner. Unto Him I cry, and unto Him is my return.
(56 AL WAQI`AH (The Inevitable) 1- 14)
When the Event inevitable Cometh to pass,
Then will no (soul) entertain falsehood concerning its coming.
(Many) will it bring low; (many) will it exalt;
When the earth shall be shaken to its depths,
And the mountains shall be crumbled to atoms,
Becoming dust scattered abroad,
And ye shall be sorted out into three classes.
Then (there will be) the Companions of the Right Hand; what will be the Companions of the Right Hand?
And the Companions of the Left Hand, what will be the Companions of the Left Hand?
And those Foremost (in Faith) will be foremost (in the Hereafter).
These will be those Nearest to Allah:
In Gardens of Bliss:
A NUMBER OF PEOPLE FROM THOSE OF OLD,
AND A FEW FROM THOSE OF LATER TİMES.
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 136 Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma`il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord: we make no difference between one and another of them: and we bow to Allah (in Islam).
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 62 Those who believe (in the Quran), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
62 AL JUMU`AH (Friday). 5 The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah: and Allah guides not people who do wrong.
5 AL MA'IDAH (The Repast). 48 To thee we sent the scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed. He would have made you a single people, but (his plan is) to test you in what he hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is he that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;
16 AL NAHL (The Bees). 93- If Allah so willed, he could make you all one people: but he leave straying whom he pleases, but ye shall certainly be called to account for all your actions.
22 AL HAJJ (The Pilgrimage). 67 To every people have We appointed rites and ceremonies which they must follow: let them not then dispute which thee on the matter, but do thou invite (them) to thy Lord: for thou art assuredly on the right way.
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 213 Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace guided the Believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guides whom He will to a path that is straight.
3 AL `IMRAN (The Family of `Imran). 19 The religion before Allah is Islam (submission to his will): nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of. Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.
Name:Jaybo •
Date: 03/06/07 21:24
A: I don't know if anybody is going to wade thru all the posts in this thread, so this comment may not even be seen... but I scanned all the preceding posts for a certain aspect and it wasn't there -- as if none of the above posters knows anything about it...
There was an Irish mystic/monk St Malachi who predicted that the end of the Catholic Church would come with the 111th pope (from Malachi's day forward). We are now on pope #111 --- after that, no more Catholic Church. Note: NOT the end of Christianity, but the end of a corrupt church and its fairy tale teachings. Check this out.
Maybe Dan Brown and Simcha are not responsible for the demise of the institution that brought us the Inquisition, the murder of the Cathars, and the attempted murder of all Knights Templar (here they failed), but it gives pause to reflect that this may be the start of the Great Apostasy....
...and that may be very healthy. People may turn to spiritual growth instead of rote (brainless) religion... Wow, what a thought!
Name:garysmplsmn •
Date: 03/07/07 2:00
A: "A: Even if the evidence was not as flimsy, some things simply are not logical: Why would Paul, Peter, and all the other Apostles put their lives on the line and even suffer death for a lie. They could not argue Christ risen when Jewish leaders could simply point at the tomb and say, "there are His bones!"
Additionally, why would the "family" tomb of Christ be located in Jeruselem when both He and His family were from Nazareth - born in Bethlehem. The family had no ties to Jeruselem except that is where Jesus was crucified. " - Rachmaninoff
Why would people die for a "lie"? There are multiple possible answers. One scenario - a la the Da Vinci Code - Gnostic belief that Jesus did not die on Calvary, but revived and went on to lead a second life with Mary Magdalene in France, etc. (which of course leaves the question of why and when he or his remains returned to Jerusalem) - may have left the disciples dumbfounded and believing they had witnessed a resurrected Jesus. Their prior belief - alonf with the Pharisees - in the resurrection surely predisposed them theologically to "see" Jesus in such a way. (Also, please keep in mind that the gospels were written 30 to 60 years after the crucifixion, during which time a lot of group think and re-think could formulate a wonderful theological explanation for what may have been a sleight of hand by Pilate and others who recognized that Jesus was not as guilty as the Sanhedrin wanted him to be.)
Regarding Jerusalem burial, you must bear in mind is that Jesus' brother James became the leader of the church in Jerusalem and probably lived there for 30 years before his death. However long the other family members lived in Jerusalem, James lived there long enough to have be considered a permanent resident and to have a tomb for his family.
In addition, you might also think of Jesus not simply as a pristine injection of God's spirit into the world - as the gospels increasingly imply over time - but as an independent-minded leader of an established movement. (By independent-minded, I mean he did not necessarily have the same perception of his "job description" as "messiah" as those who were eager to draft him for the position.) My point here is that people were expecting a messiah and were probably willing to die for one in any case. Jesus' disciples, like Jesus himself, played their hand in a way that was actually a lot less suicidal than the zealots, or some other sects. With the Romans and their indigenous clients, death for any group of non-conformists was pretty much a matter of when, not if. Don't imagine for a minute that the Christians were first in line to be martyrs. There were many who went earlier - and more willingly - than they.
"it gives pause to reflect that this [the end of the papacy] may be the start of the Great Apostasy...." - Jaybo
Jaybo, I'm not sure but that the papacy itself WAS (and IS) the great apostasy. What can be a greater affront to almighty God than a man saying he represents God on earth? Has God retreated to Pluto and left the world to the pope? Can the pope draw one breath more than his nonbelieving detractors apart from the grace of God? If he is at God's mercy like the rest of us, why does he claim so much authority? A pope may bring the people's prayers to God. God can answer for himself.
Name:SelahDream •
Date: 03/07/07 3:00
A: Excellent. Love your site! Thanks!
Name:Morning Star •
Date: 03/07/07 13:18
A: Lets be honest the bible states that Jesus body rose. If this is the tomb of Jesus then at the very least the core teaching of the new testament on the resurrection of Jesus is a lie. Paul said that if Christ is not risen then Christians faith is in vain and they are the most pitied among men.
Name:tom •
Date: 03/07/07 17:31
A: This discovery ishould be wonderful news from a Christian perspective.........for that matter any perspective!! It provides physical evidence that Jesus and his family were here...............they walked this earth..
It ,in no way, refutes the the central theme of Christianity.......the Resurrection.
The ossuaries are either authentic or not. If they're forgeries or fakes, let it be said. If they're authentic, then case closed.
Name:ionerice •
Date: 03/07/07 19:33
A: [[[[By Ollypop: (Matthew, Mark, John) which were written by those who actually walked with Jesus and viewed the events taking place first hand.]]]]
Neither Mark nor Luke ever talk to, walked with or ever witnessed any of the events that they wrote about Jesus. Their Gospels are only hearsay and 2nd hand information.
Name:ionerice •
Date: 03/07/07 20:29
A: [Kerry said: It is impossible for anyone living today to say beyond all doubt that the scriptures weren't edited.]
The reason they know that the bible was edited and changed is because they have compared today’s bible against a 4th and 5th century copy of the text and found that there are hundreds of discrepancies and additions.
Name:ionerice •
Date: 03/07/07 20:36
A: [Spiritwoman said: The Apostle Paul? Which, Paul of Tarsus? If you are referring to him then you better do some reesearch. Paul of Tarsus didn't even exist during the life time of Jesus. Meaning he was not even born yet.]
Paul was born around the 1st century AD, however he never met Jesus Christ.
Name:Elijah •
Date: 03/07/07 21:45
A: "Christianity is a religion of devils, for it is not a religion of the Lord Jesus who is God Almighty. Holiness is Jesus Christ's religion."
To the person who wrote this:
Holiness IS the Lord's religion but to be a true Christian ( a follower of Christ) is to have holiness. Be careful how you use the word Christianity.
Name:Shlomo •
Date: 03/07/07 22:27
A: It appears G-d has been demoted from infinite to finite through plagarism and contextual elimination for the past 1400 to 1900 years.
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/08/07 17:08
A: Shlomo,
If you're referring to the Christian teacing about Christ, no, thats not the case. The New Testament presentation of the hypostatic union of Christ is much more complex than this, the text indicates not that God became finite, but that the second person of the Trinity gave up the perogatives (not the infinity) of deity, and added a human nature to His nature as God. These two natures are not mixed so that his Divinity is diminished nor is His humanity exalted, but yet, Christ is one.
Basically, the doctrine person of Christ is as complex as the doctrine of the Trinity - neither is as simple as most Jews or Islamicists seem to think.
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/08/07 17:14
A: As to early attestation, its pretty clear that the NT authors believed in the Deity of Christ, and as I compare the NT account of Jesus death to the Babylonian Talmud's account, I'd say we can at least say that it seems the Jews believed it as well - I'd say this indicates that the gospels statements of Christ claiming deity are accurate, as are the actions. Additionally, Christians are said to worship Christ (something only appropriate towards God) by a Roman satirist in the second century; in addition, Justin Martyr refers to "God dying on the tree." One can't say this is a later development in Christian thought. What happened at Nicea, and later (for the person of Christ) in Chalcedon was ultimately trying to find language to define something that is so difficult for human beings to comprehend.
Research the claims for yourself, but you might want at least reference a few sources written by conservative Christians about the Trinity to argue the point. This is not meant as an insult, I'm sure its accidental because of the complexity of the doctrine and the fact that most Jews don't study Christian theology - but too often Jewish arguments on this subject tend to be strawman.
Name:samepstein •
Date: 03/09/07 23:39
A: Why is the Catholic church being bashed? We are not the ones who think the bible should be taken literally. I know we have made many, many mistakes. I know that some of the contemporary practices are out dated. The church has been around for a very long time and it has done some awful things - I know this and do not need a laundry list. The church has also done good things. We bridged the gap between Jews and Christians (thanks to Pope John Paul II). We also do not believe that we are the only way to salvation.
Like I said, we have made horrible mistakes and continue to make them. We are human. But, we are good too and have done great things. We are also more open-minded then you may think. My priest, for example, thinks this may be a wonderful discovery and that if it holds true, we may have to tweak a few things. Please do not be so judgemental.
Name:lightwoman •
Date: 03/10/07 0:23
A: "If this tomb is THE tomb of Jesus of Nazareth then Christianity as we know it is done for."
Not necessarily. I think the problem lies in the perception or belief that Jesus the physical man/body was raised rather than "he [God] raised Christ". Christ is an entity, Spirit, non-physical state of being or consciousness, if you will, and I feel Church teachings have confused people, mixing up the corporeal Jesus with the entity Christ (like some people think Christ is Jesus' last name, but it's not).
The Christ indwelled and was joined with Jesus while he walked the Earth, but it was the Christ was raised when Jesus' physical body died. Notice Paul does not say God raised Jesus, but God raised Christ. There is a difference! How are you perceiving Paul's words and the concepts of Christ and Jesus?
Perhaps the concept of the trinity is off a bit and needs to be revised, where Son includes all of mankind as the collective children of God, for that's what Jesus was teaching/reminding us who we are. If I recall, the trinity concept was created by Church leaders later, after Jesus' crucifixion; it was not created by Jesus. If I'm wrong, show me where he states this, in his words/logia from the 4 gospels, and I'll eat my hat (hey, I'm human, subject to err, just like the Church fathers....the Church fathers could have been wrong, hint, hint....).
My point is, revision doesn't have to mean the end Christianity - heck, the history of Christianity is all about revision or reformation! Jesus was reforming Judaism, LOL! The only way we grow is through change, not by stagnating - and sometimes, though painful, change is GOOD!
Shalom. :-)
Name:Shlomo •
Date: 03/10/07 6:52
A: KRS, you just proved my point; "the diety of Christ" demotes G-d from infinite to finite. [ Do not immediately react, with deep concentration read the old covenant ( avoid surface interpetration), take it two steps deeper, you will be amazed].
Name:Shlomo •
Date: 03/10/07 22:32
A: Roy - preaching Islamic Imperialism?
Name:roy •
Date: 03/11/07 11:22
A: Dear Shlomo,
I am no islamic preacher or imperialist, but a common muslim. Imperialism means gaining political, religious, or trade advantages over poorer nations which rules or helps them with money or ideology. Islam has nothing to do with Imperialism Colonialism or Global Capitalism. Is there any corrolation between todays or past islamic society and their aims with what you say?
I only believe the brotherhood to be adhered by man of any race, wealth, religion or sex. Beause they are equal and only be better than other in terms of observing God’s wishes. The religions come from same God although Jewish and Christians refuse to accept it, Islam is saying similar things plus improvement open to scientific evidence and criticism of any sort (except depicting or dishonoring holy figures). God does not need peoples recognition of the latest versions of what He says. That’s why He says keep your own faith as Christian or Jew but don’t commit sin of Trinity or false claims against Me or Jesus because I am the only One. He does not accept religions from those who curses Him in that Trias way, and will not forgive those (only sin NOT to be forgiven) .
If the trias is not accepted at Byzantene time Council 300 AD. It would have been less likely to get acceptance by plural gods greek society of that time and would have been difficult to unite them. Imperialism was on the scene that time, not now.
On the other hand if Church didnt defend their position strongly against other religions, there would have been no reason of existence of them and the priests and kings had to give up huge wealth and power over society. The latter religion forbids and devine class, rabbis, or super powered ruler, not to mention some papacy who claim to be the shadow and replica of God on earth! (another form of Imperialism)
I hope I made my point clear.
Name:roy •
Date: 03/11/07 11:55
A: Dear KRS you say” Basically, the doctrine person of Christ is as complex as the doctrine of the Trinity - neither is as simple as most Jews or Islamicists seem to think. “
Why should God be so complex not to be understood by common man? Does He address only to the scholars? If so why He held the common responsible what He says and forbids? Is He so cruel to punish those from which reasons that common people has no clue to understand?
Islam has brought the most clear understanding of God and definition of Christ for whom who wants to find out or whom God wants to reveal and let him be.
Saying God is three in one context but, One made up of three, no one can realise what is going on… How is three agree on ruling on universe that there is no disagreement between them? If God decides to extinct Jesus and Virgin Marry who will stop Him from it? How three in spiritual and matter decided to come together to send somepart of three among those miniscule sized peasants and didnt guess one piece of God will be killed there by torture? Wasnt there any other way to save people from sins rather to sacrifice one piece of God? How was it done before Christ (are they only comunity to be saved as majority of jews also claim as favored nation)? One of gods gave up divine and such sort of things are just fables from the Greek mythology. Is there any difference with Zeus who hypothetically lived on Olympos, some other god had stolen fire from him, and such nonsence and complex stories. (Some Greeks gave rebirth a new religion on that belief and ask recognition by parliament in greece today.)
Please be simple and come to your senses to find real God in your heart with peace. It will calm you down if you found Him. Searching thousands of pages but not spending time on the most referred and read book ~Quran is so big loss for you.
Name:Shlomo •
Date: 03/11/07 19:35
A: Roy - I understand your view point, but there is no middle or moderate ground to stand on, either you acept the whole idealogy of Islam or you do not. There still is an inextricable link between religious authority and political power in Islam since the Hijra. The idea of expansionism with the consolidation of all the separate umma around the world into one, under a Khalifa [supreme leader], for a religious, social-economic, and military structure is still a political modus operandi endorsed by successive generations, and remains today the basis of Islam.
The Qu'ran is the road map, the Hadith orally instructs the operational methods of obtaining success through imperialistic expansionism and the Shiriah laws [extreme civil biased laws] are applied, as required to the fullest, once Islam has conquered all nations of the world. By the way, G-d did not make a differentiation between people [ i.e infidels, slaves etc.], Islam as you know, does make that distinction with the utmost force applied.
Name:pczerwonka •
Date: 03/12/07 4:04
A: I think that the word EXTREME says it all. If YOU think that Christianity is done for then it will be FOR YOU. Too Bad.
Why is it that some Christians are so eager to dismiss everything about this finding? Are you that threatened by something, that in your opinion, is FLIMSY at best?
Why can't the teachings of Christ still be considered as good if we find out that everything was NOT written about him? Let's sit back and watch to see what comes of this. In the mean time be a Christian and if they are objective in their investigation as they seem to be they won't make something definitive or conclusive out of something unless they absolutely know without any shred of doubt. That's what a good investigator does.
Lets be logical and true to ourselves about this. Real History, Religion and Faith at times DO NOT go hand in hand.
Name:jsm •
Date: 03/12/07 5:26
A: pczerwonka,
"Why is it that some Christians are so eager to dismiss everything about this finding?"
Ummm... not that hard, think about it.
"Are you that threatened by something, that in your opinion, is FLIMSY at best?"
Threatened, not at all. Most Christians are here to make sure people in the middle understand the real facts.
"Why can't the teachings of Christ still be considered as good if we find out that everything was NOT written about him?"
Obviously you missed the bible verse given in the first post.
"Let's sit back and watch to see what comes of this."
I already know, and all of the science community does too.
"In the mean time be a Christian"
Takes one to know one, and by your questions you've asked I can strongly say that you are not one.
"That's what a good investigator does."
I haven't found one good one part of this yet.
"Real History, Religion and Faith at times DO NOT go hand in hand."
Explain this a little more in depth for me, far as I believe, they do.
Name:roy •
Date: 03/12/07 13:55
A: Dear Shlomo. The statements above partially truth; you may not find a middle ground~either accept the whole ideology of Islam or you do not, as there is no half pregnancy. (The idology only consist of Quran, no other additives of hadith and Shiriah laws which many muslim believes human inventions attributed to Islam but has no truth in them. The basis is only Quran)
Expansionism and Khalifa in today basis of İslam; is totally false and misperception. Last Khalifa was at Ottomans which has been willingly demolished by muslim authority, since it was deteriorated causing degradation of religion. It was used for interests of some groups and rulers against the credit of islam.
The expansionism and being one state is not recommended in any part of Quran. But partioning the religion into sects is forbidden.The acceptance of religion is not forced by rulers,or soldiers wherever they went. You can possibly claim İslam as the most innocent and tolerant religion in this manner.
Yes it is correct religious authority and political power in Islam was same since Hijra, but only for a short time. The state that Prophet Mohammed started has been overtrown shortly after his death. Several states emerged, often fighting with each other. But his teaching and religion has never been defeated, lived at the hearts of people till now.
Shlomo SAYS: The Qu'ran is the road map, the Hadith orally instructs the operational methods of obtaining success through imperialistic expansionism and the Shiriah laws [extreme civil biased laws] are applied, as required to the fullest, once Islam has conquered all nations of the world. By the way, G-d did not make a differentiation between people [ i.e infidels, slaves etc.], Islam as you know, does make that distinction with the utmost force applied.
Roy SAYS: Hadith is not referenced as correct. It may be taken seriously at some islamic ruled countries but not in all of them. Because they often added many false statements as bibble was destined. Shiriah laws also were attributed to hadith, which is baseless. Quran is the only reference you can take to accuse or enhance İslam.
Conquering nations is not pointed out in it. If so it would have been big mess.On the contrary, killing any one human (slaves,infidels included)without deserving is equal to killing all humans. It requires punishment of hell forever.Do you think under these cirumstances any muslim can become imperialist?
Islam does not make any distinction between slave and other man/woman, it abolished slavery at 600 AD, as rest of the world abandoned it 1850 and continued bias till 1980s, maybe still today. There is no difference between mankind as you may feel in any muslim state you go. Please read the follwing verses:
2 AL BAQARAH (The Heifer). 221 221- Don't marry unbelieving women (idolaters) until they believe: A SLAVE WOMAN who believes is better than unbelieving woman. Even though she allure you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A MAN SLAVE WHO BELIEVES IS BETTER THAN AN UNBELIEVER EVEN THOUGH HE ALLURE YOU.
4 AL NISA' (The Women). 25 25- If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, THEY MAY WED BELIEVİNG GIRLS FROM AMONG THOSE WHOM YOUR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS: and Allah hath full knowledge about your Faith. YE ARE ONE FROM ANOTHER: wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: they should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that ye practise self restraint. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Most of the statements, accusations you made seem to me the bias that has drawn over İslam either by the competitor religions or caused by the mistakes that islamists did in the past or present. Reality has nothing to do with it. Slavery was de facto of that time and has been advised to replace freedom whenever possible at Quran.
Good day .
Name:HoaxBusting •
Date: 03/13/07 5:01
A: .... IMHO if it is done right, this might be refreshingly other kind of debate..I would point out that scholars are decidedly in one camp ::
::
PS - Talking 'bout how this is coming from a completely commercial enterprise is a bit below the belt!!
Name:HoaxBusting •
Date: 03/13/07 5:03
A: .. .. I would point out that scholars are decidedly in.the camp that it's a fake. Wrongly or rightly.THAT IS.the place we are forced to start from. That means that there is a lot of crazy talk.I think it's a lot of heat and very little light. Problem it is the type of subject I'd be careful whatever the issue. I don't think it would matter if MANY christians naturally feel "attacked" In the past I wouldn't have cared but I do want to care..Can we talk about the objects that bare on this discussion. And much less about Jesus of Nazareth or orthodox Christianity ???
Name:sam •
Date: 03/26/07 18:19
A: Chris,
The churches deny everything found, from the many real gospels to the tomb, because the truth might put them out of business, but in the same time they accept every hoax if it brings more business, for example: the many sighting of Mary in churches, and the many healing that goes on in churches, and the shroud of Torin, they brought a lot visitors and $$, while all been found and proven to be hoax. The Popes still visinting the shroud and keep it safe!!!.
What been said by Paul, is true and that is why the churches are so worried when a discovery found, and some of those are kept hidden in the Vatican because those if published they might bring the end of Christianity as we know it today.
Chris, you done your research as i understand, and you come to the results that the scientific work done for the tomb are "flimsy at best", can you bring down your research to this forums and let everyone see if your work as Theologian are "Flimsy or not"?.
I did my own research too, and here it is:
GOD KNOWS THE WORLD WHICH HE CREATED. JESUS WORD REPRESENTS THE TRUTH BECAUSE, BECAUSE HIS WORD CAME FROM GOD AND NOT HIS.
Jesus the prophet, which you make Him a God, He did not hear about America, and doesn't know much about the world which He was born in. He doesn't know that there are many land and many other people beyond the seas, America which is you backyard today , Australia, the north pole & the south, not even the land and the people of much of the southern part of Africa. The God which you create doest not know the reality of the stars and the universe that He live in!!! But Galileo, Colombos, Hubble & Jocobovici knows.
Anyone who reads the Christians history, (Here I mean the outsider & not the ones who been blinded,by their belief) will recognize that it was built and constructed by few, who forced their teaching over the others and destroyed the real gospels and replaced it by letters from those who never been with the main teacher (Rabbi) and the prophet Jesus. that is a fact, so do not deny it.
Mr. Jacobovici brought a case and try to prove it by scientific measures, and while going in my own search through the gospels I did find the story that prove that Jesus was married and had a son, here my findings:
FROM THE KING JAMES VERSION: MARY MAGDALENE. 11 matches.
Matthew 27
[56] Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's children.
[61] And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.
Matthew 28
[1] In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
Mark 15
[40] There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;
[47] And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid.
Mark 16
[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[9] Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Luke 24
[10] It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.
John 19
[25] Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
John 20
[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
[18] Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.
In the four gospels MARY MAGDALENE name were repeated 11 times
Her name first....................followed by the others
In Matthew:(27:56) 1- Mary Magdalene.. Mary the mother of James & Jose....
(27:61) 2- Mary Magdalene .............the other Mary.
(28:1 ) 3- Mary Magdalene .............the other Mary.
In Mark: (15:40)4- Mary Magdalen .....Mary the mother of James....
(15:47)5- Mary Magdalene ..............Mary the mother of Joses....
(16: 1)6- Mary Magdalene ............Mary the mother of James...
(16: 9)7- Mary Magdalene (When Jesus was risen, He appeared FIRST to Mary Magdalene).
In Luke: (24:10)8- Mary Magdalene ..........and Joanna, and the mother of James...
In John: (19:25)9- Jesus mother, and her sister, and.....Mary Magdalene.
(20: 1)10- Mary Magdalene ( She was THE FIRST to see the stone taken away).
(20:18)11- Mary Magdalene .....(She was THE FIRST who told the disciples, that she had seen the lord.)
.(20:18)11- Mary Magdalene .....(She was THE FIRST who told the disciples, that she had seen the lord.)
Mary Magdalene’ name came (7 times) before the other women names,
Mary Magdalene’ name came (3 TIMES) FIRST, AND THE ONLY ONE.
Only once (1 time) Her name came after Mary the mother of Jesus and her sister.
Going back to the gospel of John 19:25, "Therefore THE SOLDIERS did these things. BUT STANDING BY THE CROSS of Jesus were HIS MOTHER, and HIS MOTHER’S SISTER, MARY THE WIFE OF CLOPAS, and MARY MAGDALENE."
19:26 - "When Jesus, then saw His mother, and the disciple (one disciple) WHOM HE LOVED ( Mary Magdalene) standing nearby, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold, your son!"...19:27- "Then He said to the disciple (Mary Magdalene), behold, your mother!". From that hour the disciple (Mary Magdalene) took Her (Jesus mother) into HIS OWN HOUSEHOLD (Jesus own household).
From all what we read above, some questions will arise:
A- Why Mary Magdalene name has to come before Mary Jesus' mother, and many times?.
B- Why She was the first and the only woman to visit the site where Jesus buried?.
C- Why Jesus appear to Her before the others, even His own mother?.
D- Why She was the one that Jesus chose to give His message to the others?.
The answer for these questions will come from John own words when he Said, "THE DISCIPLE WHOM HE LOVED", from all the women who been standing around Jesus at that moment, there is only one woman whom can be called a disciple and she was always with Him, and that woman is Mary Magdalene, "whom He loved".
And Jesus asking the disciple (Mary Magdalene) to look after His mother "your mother",(her mother in-law). And the disciple took her to Jesus OWN HOUSEHOLD(which include His wife and son) which is the same place that the disciple live in.
Jesus asked His mother to look after, "your son"* !, and the question here, "WHO IS THE SON?, is it Jesus?, and He is on the cross facing death, and she cannot do anything for Him, or any of His brothers, those are grown up men who live in their own households, and they can care for themselves.
"BEHOLD, YOUR SON"... "BEHOLD, YOUR MOTHER". The disciple is not the daughter of His mother, and the son cannot be one of His many brothers.
* Jesus understand well, that if He mentioned the son as His son, that He will be putting the life of His child at risk, because the place around Him is filled with SOLDIERS and the people who hated Him and wanted Him to be crucified.
"THE DISCIPLE (MARY MAGDALENE) TOOK HER". And since Mary, Jesus mother is going to live in Jesus own household with (Mary Magdalene) the disciple whom Her son loved, there is only one person in that household who need to be looked after, and that is "THE SON", and of course the son here is her grandson, JESUS’ SON, the child "son" who needs the care of his grandmother, since His mother "wife" is the only one who can take care of His mother.
Jesus started His ministry at the age of thirty, and He met with Mary Magdalene sometimes after that, and He was on the cross at age of thirty three, so from that we can say the child (the son) is about the age of two years, and His mother, the disciple, is an active disciple preaching and teaching people, and Jesus knows this fact, so He asked His mother to move in to take care of the child, His son.
God bless you.
Name:Elizabeth •
Date: 03/27/07 4:02
A: Mr. Simcha, (and to those concerned Christians)
It is wrong for anyone, other than God, to judge what was/is truly in your heart concerning your motives as to why you chose this project. I pray
it was for good reasons. I applaud your interest in it.
I would like to offer my thoughts on the topic.
1) I do believe it is possible that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene
(Which would explain why Satan tempted Jesus with all things...except women (Mt 4), and oil anointing, and 1st at tomb, at crucifixion, etc.)
2) Yet, He certainly was both man and God in flesh. He died on the cross, was resurrected, and seen by thousands. But not in a physical
body, but a spiritual one- which ascended to Heaven.
Now I don't know if your tomb is - the tomb. However, it is possible. And the New Testament is accurate, as well.
Here's my beliefs concerning how that is possible...
Mary was, indeed, his wife- which is why he appeared to her first. When he spoke not to cling to him, was as a husband would say to a wife. He
knew he could not stay with her.
Within our body is a soul and spirit. (God, the Father, is a spirit.) When our physical bodies die, our soul and spirit live on. The soul
surrounds the spirit (like our mind) and it is the spirit that manifests the soul which is like our bodies, but eternal. This is how those
saw him and felt him. It certainly appears as a physical body, but is an eternal body.
The Shroud of Turin is real. When Jesus was resurrected (the first- as he said so), the spirit of God was within him. The spirit of God, The Father,
is unlike any other spirit, so powerful that it reacted in comparison to a body being cremated so much so that it left an imprint on the Shroud.
Now...
When Mary came to the tomb and found it opened-- Jesus's body was indeed missing.
She went to get the apostle Peter, both returned.
Peter went inside and saw that Jesus' body was missing, the linen clothes lay about. But the napkin that had lay across his face was wrapped,
and put aside.
Peter, wanting to get to the bottom of it all, ran back. But Mary stayed, and the Lord appeared to her 1st.
So, if Mary was his wife would not his physical remains belong to her, while his soul and spirit belonged to God?
So, I ask you Mr. Simcha- what do you think was in the napkin?
John 20:7
wrapped: to enclose in something.
fold: to wrap up
Jesus was God in flesh, and nothing can ever change that- even if He was married... It is true.
Blessings, ED
Name:rospeter •
Date: 03/27/07 14:11
A: I'm not sure what your specific sects believe, but if this tomb is really THE tomb of Jesus the Christ and his bones are in the ossuary, then it would be the end of my religion. I am LDS and we believe in a literal resurrection of Jesus Christ, both body and spirit. This is an essential part of how we can overcome sin.
Name:Elizabeth •
Date: 03/27/07 17:00
A: Dear rospeter,
If it is true, I pray you reconsider and not turn from Christ. If our soul and spirit is within our flesh, while on this Earth, is it not apart of your "literal" resurrection beliefs? Has it not, then, always been within us? Even Moses had difficulty being before the Spirt of God, perhaps it is impossible in this flesh, something it could not withstand. But no doubt we are given a new body, our soul which is manifested by the spirit, and will live on forever and ever. It does not take away from the salvation that Jesus brought us through his blood. Before his sacrifice, we remained dead or what He called "in sleep" and it would have been impossible for us to live again- without him. He saved us from ourselves. Truly, I tell you,
nothing has changed, only a clearer understanding. We should want to know- did He not give us free-will and the ability to learn, to think for ourselves? Jesus said we would appear as He appeared- and it is true, but this time it is eternal. Remember, Jesus said He was more than just a spirit and that He could be touched just like our physical bodies- and He meant it.
Blessings to you, ED
Name:revelation616 •
Date: 03/27/07 23:21
A: Theologians are not revelationists. Christianity is not doomed. What will come is a re-examination of what has been taught. Jesus was always an Essene. He just chose to take the message beyond this secret sect. He was always a Jew. But was Jesus the Comforter? To blaspheme the Holy Spirit is an unforgiveable sin. Have we as a whole come to blaspheme the Holy Spirit. Is the Holy Spirit a divine male such as Jesus, or a Divine female? Shekkinah Spirit is known as the presence of God upon this Earth. She has come to be thought of by men as an evil female diety in high trees. Mother Nature. If you have come to idolize a Man and think of Him as a God. You have blasphemed the Holy Spirit. You are in darkness. And that darkness will take you to the grave.
Name:Anchorite •
Date: 03/28/07 4:05
A: If the Mystery is the the Light, and the Knowledge is the Dark, then the place for us is the middle part.
Name:Elizabeth •
Date: 03/28/07 19:50
A: When I was younger, I would have considered myself an atheist. I worked in the science field and it was what was logical
and religion/spirituality illogical. The belief in God, Heaven- and certainly Hell seemed more of a myth. But my life changed literally over night. I had a near-death experience and spiritual experiences that followed. I felt the experience left me with insights, such as the knowledge of the "napkin." I'm of average mind and all things- a repented sinner. I was not one who believed without seeing, so I am appreciative.
Today I am a minister. And for me, the belief in Jesus Christ and life after death are a fact.
I would also like to add that I have believed, since my NDE, that it is the soul and spirit that ascends to Heaven, not one's flesh. Jesus said
he was the "resurrection and the life." There are claims of thousands of people having NDEs- in which they have left their physical bodies. So if it is so- then wouldn't Jesus be the example of that very thing he said he was? It is how John the Baptist was, indeed, Elijah. And although I believe in the entire Bible, including when Elijah ascended in flesh, I don't believe he remained in flesh. (I know this from my own experience.) Paul (Hebrews 9:27) was right when he said the flesh lives once. As in Genesis, we came from the Earth and to it we (our physical bodies) will return. John the Baptist did not know he was Elijah- because it was not the point, yet he understood his mission well and Jesus knew who he was. There is not much written concerning the wives during Jesus' ministry because they were not the point. It wasn't about them. They were servants, first, to the Christ. Jesus came to teach us directly what God expected from us and to save us from ourselves.
Blessings, Elizabeth Daniele, author of "Proof of God"
Name:Anchorite •
Date: 03/29/07 3:59
A: Hi CRosebrough,
Saw your site. Good points. Combined with Kilpatrick (Secret Symbols/Temple of Augustus) I am starting to see that the picture is bigger than I thought. I wonder how the facts were selected. I haven't spent any money just yet!
Thank you for you efforts!
Name:Panluna •
Date: 03/29/07 20:10
A: So If this is the end of Christianity what religion or philosophy would you turn to?i believe John wrote"And the Truth shall set you free"Or will Faith keep everything going?
Name:Anchorite •
Date: 03/30/07 5:54
A: Dear Panluna, my utmost reply...
It is not the end of Christianity because most people believe whatever they want.
I prefer the concepts of Honesty and "Willingness-to-take-your-lumps" over Truth, simply because we are so often wrong yet never lose the ability to improve.
My guide is flexible philosophy, rather than rigid religion. In one word, Poise. In three words, Imagination-Poise-Sense. In more words, the attempt to preserve elegance by capitulating neither to spontaneous innovation nor to full calculation.
I think following Christ is OK, except His words have been hopelessly messed up!
I believe in a "new" idea: that Science is the result of totally subscribing to The Mystery, whilst Religion is just the result of hastiness.
Science is the "turtle eternal". Dedicated to the proposition that knowledge must be carefully tested, if any knowledge can long endure.
If my view prevails the Christian Church will fail, but the meek shall inherit indeed, and Jesus would be pleased.
Name:roy •
Date: 04/02/07 22:58
A: Dear Panluna and whoever have curiosity about origins of Christian faith today. There is no need to be desperate, the knowledge will make us free.
There are too many proofs that Bible was edited, added many false claims, manupulated according to politics, finally diverted from its true path. Muslims hadiths books were similar in their destiny. They were overly biased, lies alleged to Mohammad (sas) added, religion overburdened with unnecessary hardships, bigotry, bidat (added ruling, principles).
They took their toll to the extent that, they claimed Mohammad, as the imam of all prophets, for whom the earth was created for. In one hadith they claim he went several times between God and Moses to reduce repetition of prayer in a day from 50 times down to five times. It was claimed on some occasions inspired by christian faith, God had shank (God forbid! Never).
Early Christian belief was too much different than todays versions. I put down the historic events and different sects of Christians, some still in effect today, which have been very close to Muslim version of religion. It shows only one truth that God has sent several prophets, prescribing same religion at basic concepts ,ie.. pray one God only, give charity, not kill or commit adultry, etc.. I hope this will give a secular insight to our beliefs.
Roy’s note: Please bear in mind that the notes were written according to Biblical names, here Jesus was referred as son instead of prophet, many times. (it is misleading attribute as the true meaning should be God slave and Messenger according to muslim faith.)
NONTRINITARIANISM
Nontrinitarianism is any of various Christian beliefs that reject the doctrine that God is three distinct persons in one being, (the Trinity).
The notion of the Trinity is not of particular importance to most nontrinitarians. Persons and groups espousing this position generally do not refer to themselves affirmatively by the term, although some nontrinitarian groups such as the Unitarians have adopted a name that bespeaks of their belief in God as subsisting in a theological or cosmic unity. Modern nontrinitarian groups views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
Various nontrinitarian views, such as Arianism, existed alongside what is now considered mainstream Christianity before the Trinity was formally defined as doctrine in AD 325. Nontrinitarianism was very rare for hundreds of years. It surfaced again in the Gnosticism of the Cathars and in the Enlightenment and Restorationism.
Forms of Nontrinitarianism
ALL NONTRINITARIANS ARGUE THAT THE DOCTRINE OF THE EARLIEST FORM OF THE CHURCH WAS NOT TRINITARIAN. Typically, nontrinitarians explain that the Church was altered as a direct and indirect consequence of the edicts of Constantine the Great, which resulted in toleration of the Christian religion, and the eventual adoption of Trinitarian Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire. Because it was at this time of a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically find the development of the doctrine questionable. It is in this light that the Nicene Creed is seen by nontrinitarians as an essentially political document, resulting from the subordination of Church to State interests by the leaders of Catholic Church, so that the Church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.
Although Nontrinitarian beliefs of a great variety continued to multiply, and among some people (such as the Lombards in the West) it was dominant for hundreds of years afterward, the Trinitarians now had the immense power of the Empire behind them. NONTRINITARIANS TYPICALLY ARGUE THAT THE PRIMITIVE BELIEFS OF THE CHURCH WERE SYSTEMATICALLY SUPPRESSED (EVEN TO THE POINT OF DEATH), AND THAT THE HISTORICAL RECORD, PERHAPS ALSO INCLUDING THE SCRIPTURES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, WAS ALTERED AS A CONSEQUENCE.
Nontrinitarian followers of Jesus fall into roughly four different groups.
• Some believe that Jesus is not God, instead believing that he was a messenger from God, or Prophet, or the perfect created human. This is the view espoused by modern day Unitarianism and ancient sects such as the Ebionites. A specific form of Nontrinitarianism is Arianism, which had become the dominant view in some regions in the time of the Roman Empire. Arianism taught the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but held that the Son was not co-eternal with the Father. However, Arians did not consider worship of Jesus as wrong.[citation needed] Another early form of Nontrinarianism was Monarchianism.
• Others believe that the one God who revealed himself in the Old Testament as Jehovah revealed himself in his Son, Jesus Christ. This is a doctrine known originally as Sabellianism or modalism, although it is explained somewhat differently in the churches which hold these beliefs today. Examples of such churches today are Oneness Pentecostals and the New Church.
• Several denominations within Mormonism (including the largest, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) accept the divinity of Jesus, but believe the three persons of the Trinity to be separate. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints specifically holds that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct individuals (D&C 130:22), but can and do act together in perfect unity as a single monotheistic entity (the "Godhead") for the common purpose of saving mankind, Jesus Christ having received divine investiture of authority from Heavenly Father in the pre-existence.
• Several denominations within the Sabbatarian Church of God and certain groups within Seventh-day Adventism accept the divinity of the Father and Jesus the Son, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a Being. The Living Church of God, for example, teaches, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and emanates from Them throughout the entire universe". This view has historically been termed Semi-Arianism or Binitarianism.
kingdomready.org/topics/god.php
[ GOD IS 1 NOT 3 ]
Only the Father, Yahweh, is God. Jesus is the Son of God, His only begotten Son, the Messiah. The Bible emphatically and repeatedly sets forth Yahweh's supremacy and exclusivity. There are no other gods besides Him. God is all powerful, everywhere present, immortal, invisible, and all knowing. He did not become a man, His word (reason, intent, plan, self-expression) did. Jesus is the perfect human who always did what God wanted done and always spoke what God wanted said. In fact, it was Jesus who said that the Father is the only one who is truly God (John 17.3). Paul likewise confessed belief in a single deity when he said, "Yet, for us there is but one God, the Father...and one Lord, Jesus Christ..." (1 Corinthians 8.6). Below are resources that aim to describe what the Bible teaches not the philosophies of men.
Origins and basis for Nontrinitarianism
Nontrinitarians claim the roots of their position go back farther than those of their counterpart Trinitarians. The biblical basis for each side of the issue is debated chiefly on the question of the divinity of Jesus. Nontrinitarians note that in deference to God, Jesus rejected even being called "good", that he disavowed omniscience as the Son,[1] and that he referred to ascending unto "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God", and that he said "the Father is the only true God." Additionally, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 when saying in Mark 12:29 "The most important one (commandment)," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one."
Siding with nontrinitarians, scholars investigating the historical Jesus often assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar). Jesus Seminar is a research team of about 135 New Testament scholars founded in 1985 by the late Robert Funk and John Dominic Crossan under the auspices of the Westar Institute.[1][2] The seminar's purpose is to use historical methods to determine what Jesus, as a historical figure, may or may not have said or done. In addition, the seminar popularizes research into the historical Jesus. The public is welcome to attend the twice-yearly meetings. They produced new translations of the New Testament plus the Gospel of Thomas to use as textual sources. They published their results in three reports The Five Gospels (1993),[3] The Acts of Jesus (1998),[4] and The Gospel of Jesus (1999).[5] They also run a series of lectures and workshops in various U.S. cities.
The text of the Nicene Creed and the Trinity state that the three are "coequal". This is the term actually used in the Doctrine. One might consider co-owners of a business as being equal owners but with different roles to play in operating the business. But nontrinitarians point to a very important statement by Jesus that contradicts the use of the term equal or "coequal". It is a simple passage where Jesus stated his explicit subordinance to the Father: "for my Father is Greater than I(John 14:28)."
In addition, the Trinity and the Nicene Creed were doctrines established over 300 years after the time of Christ on Earth as a result of conflict within the early Church. It is curious to note that Jesus had forewarned the reader in Matthew "beware the doctrines of men".
Some nontrinitarians accept that Scripture teaches Christ is divine in some sense, and the son of God, but deny the personality of the Holy Spirit.
Main Points of Dissent
1. The Trinity as being irrational
Criticism of the doctrine includes the argument that its "mystery" is essentially an inherent irrationality, where the persons of God are claimed to share completely a single divine substance, the "being of God", and yet not partake of each others' identity. It is also pointed out that many polytheistic pre-Christian religions arranged many of their gods in trinities, and that this doctrine may been promoted by Church leaders to make Christendom more acceptable to surrounding cultures.
2. Possible lack of Scriptural support
The New Catholic Encyclopedia, for example, says, "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]"[14], "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council]...prior to the end of the 4th century"[15], and The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia adds, "The doctrine is not explicitly taught in the New Testament". The question, however, of why such a supposedly central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this, and for his opposition to infant baptism.
3. Divinity of Jesus
For some, debate over the biblical basis of the doctrine tends to revolve chiefly over the question of the deity of Jesus (see Christology). Those who reject the divinity of Jesus argue among other things that Jesus rejected being called so little as good in deference to God (versus "the Father") , disavowed omniscience as the Son, "learned obedience" , and referred to ascending unto "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God" .
They also dispute that "Elohim" denotes plurality, noting that this name in nearly all circumstances takes a singular verb and arguing that where it seems to suggest plurality, Hebrew grammar still indicates against it. They also point to statements by Jesus such as his declaration that the Father was greater than he or that he was not omniscient, in his statement that of a final day and hour not even he knew, but the Father , and to Jesus' being called the firstborn of creation and 'the beginning of God's creation,' which argues against his being eternal.
In Theological Studies #26 (1965) p.545-73, Does the NT call Jesus God?, Raymond E. Brown wrote that there are "texts that seem to imply that the title God was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject."
Trinitarians, and some non-Trinitarians such as the Modalists who also hold to the divinity of Jesus Christ, claim that these statements are based on the fact that Jesus existed as the Son of God in human flesh. Thus he is both God and man, who became "lower than the angels, for our sake" and who was tempted as humans are tempted, but did not sin .
Some Nontrinitarians counter the belief that the Son was limited only during his earthly life (Trinitarians believe, instead, that Christ retains full human nature even after his resurrection), by citing ("the head of Christ [is] God" [KJV]), written after Jesus had returned to Heaven, thus placing him still in an inferior relation to the Father. Additionally, they claim that Jesus became exalted after ascension to Heaven, and regarding Jesus as a distinct personality in Heaven, all after his ascension.
4. Possible un-Biblical terminology
Christian Unitarians, Restorationists, and others question the doctrine of the Trinity because it relies on non-Biblical terminology. The term "Trinity" is not found in scripture and the number three is never associated with God in any sense other than within the Comma Johanneum. Detractors hold that the only number ascribed to God in the Bible is One and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a threeness to God that is not Biblical.
5. Many scriptural citations lack the Holy Spirit
It is also argued that the vast majority of scriptures that Trinitarians offer in support of their beliefs refer to the Father and to Jesus, but not to the Holy Spirit. This suggests that the concept of the trinity was not well-established in the early Christian community.
6. Whether it is truly monotheistic or not
The teaching is also pivotal to inter-religious disagreements with two of the other major faiths, Judaism and Islam; the former reject Jesus' divine mission entirely, the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet just like Muhammad but rejects altogether the deity of Jesus. Many within Judaism and Islam also accuse Christian Trinitarians of practicing polytheism, of believing in three gods rather than just one. Islam holds that because Allah is unique and absolute (the concept of tawhid) the Trinity is impossible and has even been condemned as polytheistic. This is emphasized in the Qur'an which states "He (Allah) does not beget, nor is He begotten, And (there is) none like Him." (Qur'an, 112:3-4)
Scriptural texts cited as implying opposition
Among Bible verses cited by opponents of Trinitarianism are those that claim there is only one God, the Father. Other verses state that Jesus Christ was a man. Trinitarians explain these apparent contradictions by reference to the mystery and paradox of the Trinity itself. This is a partial list of verses implying opposition to Trinitarianism:
One God
• Matthew 4:10: "Jesus said to him, 'Away from me, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."'"
• John 17:3: "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."
• 1Corinthians 8:5-6: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."
• 1Timothy 2:5: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"
The Son is subordinate to the Father
• Mark 13:32:"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
• John 5:19: "Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."
• John 14:28: "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
• John 17:20-23: "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."
• Colossians 1:15: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation."
• 1stCorinthians 15:24-28: "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
Jesus is not the old testament God
• John 2:16: And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
• Acts 3:13: The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up...
• John 20:17: Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.
• Daniel 7:13: I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
• Psalms 110:1: Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Ontological Differences Between "God" and Jesus
• John 17:1-3 Jesus prays to God.
• Hebrews 2:17,18 Hebrews 3:2 Jesus has faith in God.
• Acts 3:13 Jesus is a servant of God.
• Mark 13:32 Revelation 1:1 Jesus does not know things God knows.
• John 4:22 Jesus worships God.
• Revelation 3:12 Jesus has one who is God to him.
• 1stCorinthians 15:28 Jesus is in subjection to God.
• 1stCorinthians 11:1 Jesus' head is God.
• Hebrews 5:7 Jesus has reverent submission, fear, of God.
• Acts 2:36 Jesus is given lordship by God.
• Acts 5:31 Jesus is exalted by God.
• Hebrews 5:10 Jesus is made high priest by God.
• Philippians 2:9 Jesus is given aurthority by God.
• Luke 1:32,33 Jesus is given kingship by God.
• Acts 10:42 Jesus is given judgment by God.
• Acts 2:24, Romans 10.9, 1 Cor 15:15 "God raised [Jesus] from the dead".
• Mark 16:19, Luke 22:69, Acts 2:33, Romans 8:34 Jesus is at the right hand of God.
• 1 Tim 2:5 Jesus is the one human mediator between the one God and man.
• 1 Cor 15:24-28 God put everything, except Himself, under Jesus.
Alternate views to the Trinity
There have been numerous other views of the relations of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; the most prominent include:
• Arius believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father, firstborn of all Creation. However, the Son did have Divine status. This view is very close to that of Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Ebionites believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father and nothing more than a special human.
• Marcion believed that there were two Deities, one of Creation / Hebrew Bible and one of the New Testament.
• Modalism states that God has taken numerous forms in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, and that God has manifested Himself in three primary modes in regards to the salvation of mankind.
• Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in One Person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the Being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary.
• The Urantia Book teaches that God is the first "Uncaused Cause" who is a personality that is omniscient, omnipresent, transcendent, infinite, eternal and omnipotent, but He is also a person of the Original Trinity - "The Paradise Trinity" who are the "First Source and Center, Second Source and Center, and Third Source and Center" or otherwise described as "God, The Eternal Son, and The Divine Holy Spirit".
• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, aka "Mormons," hold that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct individuals (Covenant 130:22), but can and do act together in perfect unity as a single monotheistic entity (the "Godhead") for the common purpose of saving mankind, Jesus Christ having received divine investiture of authority from Heavenly Father in the pre-existence.
• Docetism comes from the Greek: δοκηο (doceo), meaning "to seem." This view holds that Jesus only seemed to be human and only appeared to die.
• Adoptionism holds that Jesus was chosen on the event of his baptism to be anointed by the Holy Spirit and became divine upon resurrection.
• Rastafarians accept Haile Selassie I, the former (and last) emperor of Ethiopia, as Jah (the Rasta name for God incarnate, from a shortened form of Jehovah found in Psalms 68:4 in the King James Version of the Bible), and part of the Holy Trinity as the messiah promised to return in the Bible.
• Islam's Holy Book, the Quran, denounces the concept of Trinity (Qur'an 4:171, 5:72-73, 112:1-4), also in nonstandard forms, a Trinity composed of Father, Son and Mary (Qur'an 5:116). Inclusion of Mary in the presumed trinity may have been due to either a quasi-Christian sect known as the Collyridians in Arabia who apparently believed that Mary was divine, or use of the title "Mother of God" to refer to Mary.
Theory of pagan origin and influence
Nontrinitarian Christians have long contended that the doctrine of the Trinity is a prime example of Christian borrowing from pagan sources. According to this view, a simpler idea of God was lost very early in the history of the Church, through accommodation to pagan ideas, and the "incomprehensible" doctrine of the Trinity took its place. As evidence of this process, a comparison is often drawn between the Trinity and notions of a divine triad, found in pagan religions and Hinduism. Hinduism has a triad, i.e., Trimurti.
Some find a direct link between the doctrine of the Trinity, and the Egyptian theologians of Alexandria, for example. They suggest that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Christ, was an intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.
Nontrinitarians assert that Catholics must have recognized the pagan roots of the trinity, because the allegation of borrowing was raised by some disputants during the time that the Nicene doctrine was being formalized and adopted by the bishops. For example, in the 4th century Catholic Bishop Marcellus of Ancyra's writings, On the Holy Church,9 :
Such a late date for a key term of Nicene Christianity, and attributed to a Gnostic, they believe, lends credibility to the charge of pagan borrowing. Marcellus was rejected by the Catholic Church for teaching a form of Sabellianism.
The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity and the pagan and syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.
Hellenic influences on Christian thought
Advocates of the "Hellenic origins" argument consider it well supported by primary sources. They see these sources as tracing the influence of Philo on post-Apostolic Christian philosophers - many of them ex-pagan Hellenic philosophers - who then interpreted Scripture through the Neoplatonic filter of their original beliefs and subsequently incorporated those interpretations into their theology. The early synthesis between Hellenic philosophy and early Christianity was certainly made easier by the fact that so many of the earliest apologists (such as Athenagoras and Justin Martyr) were Greek converts themselves, whose original beliefs had consisted more of philosophy than religion.
Controversy over Nontrinitarianism's Status
Most nontrinitarians identify themselves as Christian. In this regard The Encyclopedia Britannica states, "To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God....They therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by Whom all else was created....[this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."This view (nonrtinitarian) “in the early church”, still supported by some Christians, generates controversy among mainstream Christians. Most members of mainstream Christianity considered it heresy not to believe in the Trinity.
Although some denominations require their members to profess faith in the trinity, most mainline denominations have taken a "hands-off" policy on the subject of the trinity, realizing that since personal study and free thought have been encouraged for years, it is not surprising that some of the conclusions reached would be nontrinitarian. The recognition here is that the trinity is tool for pointing to a greater truth. In other words, Christianity has historically sought to look beyond its doctrines (see Apophasis) to the greater truth they are intended to address, IE God. It is not uncommon for a Methodist, Presbyterian, or Anglican to profess non-trinitarian views, even among the clergy. The response from the governing bodies of those denominations is usually neutral, so long as the disagreement is voiced in respect.
Nontrinitarian Christian groups
• American Unitarian Conference
• Arian Catholicism
• Arianism
• Bible Students
• Christadelphians
• Christian Conventions a non-denominational group which publishes no dogmatic positions, but which a majority of observers classify as non-Trinitarian
• Church of Christ, Scientist
• Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith)
• Church of the Blessed Hope (Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith)
• Creation Seventh Day Adventism
• Doukhobors
• Higher Ground Online
• Jehovah's Witnesses
• Living Church of God
• Living Hope International Ministries
• Molokan
• Monarchianism
• New Church
• Oneness Pentecostals
• Polish Brethren
• Socinianism
• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church; see also Mormon)
• The Way International
• Unification Church
• Unitarian Christians
• Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship
• Iglesia ni Cristo
• True Jesus Church
Nontrinitarian people
• Natalius, ~200
• Sabellius, ~220
• Paul of Samosata, 269
• Arius, 336
• Eusebius of Nicomedia, 341, baptized Constantine
• Constantius II, Byzantine Emperor, 361
• Antipope Felix II, 365
• Aëtius, 367
• Ulfilas, Apostle to the Goths, 383
• Priscillian, 385, considered first Christian to be executed for heresy
• Muhammad, 632, see also Isa
• Ludwig Haetzer, 1529
• Juan de Valdés, 1541
• Michael Servetus, 1553, burned at the stake in Geneva under John Calvin
• Sebastian Castellio, 1563
• Ferenc Dávid, 1579
• Fausto Paolo Sozzini, 1604
• John Biddle, 1662
• Thomas Aikenhead, 1697, last person to be hanged for blasphemy in Britain
• John Locke, 1704
• Isaac Newton, 1727
• William Whiston, 1752, expelled from University of Cambridge in 1710
• Jonathan Mayhew, 1766
• Emanuel Swedenborg, 1772
• Benjamin Franklin, 1790
• Joseph Priestley, 1804
• Joseph Smith, 1805
• Thomas Paine, 1809
• Thomas Jefferson, 1826
• James Madison, 1836
• William Ellery Channing, 1842
• Robert Hibbert, 1849
• John Thomas (Christadelphian), 1871
• Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1882
• Benjamin Wilson, 18??
• James Martineau, 1900
• Charles Taze Russell, 1916
• Neville Chamberlain, 1940
• William Branham, 1965
• Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986
UNİTARİANİSM
Unitarianism is the belief in the oneness of God opposed to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in one God). Unitarians believe in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus.
Unitarianism as a system of Christian thought and religious observance has its basis, as opposed to that of orthodox Trinitarianism, in the unipersonality of the Christian Godhead, i.e. in the idea that the Godhead exists in the person of the Father alone. Unitarians trace their history back to the Apostolic age, claim for their doctrine a prevalence during the ante-Nicene period. A small number of Unitarians claim a continuity through Arian communities and individual thinkers to the present time.
ARİANİSM
God the Father ("unbegotten"), always existing, was separate from the lesser Jesus Christ ("only-begotten"), born before time began and creator of the world. The Father, working through the Son, created the Holy Spirit, who was subservient to the Son as the Son was to the Father. The Father was seen as "the only true God."
Arianism refers to the theological positions made famous by the theologian Arius (c. 250-336 AD), who lived and taught in Alexandria, Egypt, in the early 4th century. The controversial teachings of Arius dealt with the relationship between God the Father and the person of Jesus Christ, a relationship known as the doctrine of the Trinity.
While Arianism continued to dominate for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility and higher ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed theologically and politically in the Roman Empire at the end of the fourth century. Arianism, which had been taught by the Arian missionary Ulfilas to the Germanic tribes, was dominant for some centuries among several Germanic tribes in western Europe, especially Goths and Longobards, but ceased to be the mainstream belief by the 8th Century AD. Trinitarianism remained the dominant doctrine in all major branches of the Eastern and Western Church and within Protestantism, although there have been several anti-trinitarian movements, some of which acknowledge various similarities to classical Arianism.
ANOMOEAN
In 4th century Christianity, the Anomœans, also known as Anomeans, Heterousians, Aetians, or Eunomians, were a sect of Arians who asserted that Jesus Christ (the Son) was of a different nature and in no way like to that of God (the Father).
The word is from Greek α(ν)- 'not' and όμοίος 'similar' i.e. "different; dissimilar".
In the 4th century, this was the name by which the followers of Aëtius and Eunomius were distinguished; they not only denied the consubstantiality of Jesus but even asserted that he was of a nature different from that of God. This was in contradistinction to the semi-Arians, who indeed denied the consubstantiality of Jesus, but believed at the same time that he was like the Father.
ARİANİSM İN THE EARLY MEDİEVAL GERMANİC KİNGDOMS
During the time of Arianism's flowering in Constantinople, the Gothic convert Ulfilas (later the subject of the letter of Auxentius cited above) was sent as a missionary to the Gothic barbarians across the Danube, a mission favored for political reasons by emperor Constantius II. Ulfilas' initial success in converting this Germanic people to an Arian form of Christianity was strengthened by later events. When the Germanic peoples entered the Roman Empire and founded successor-kingdoms in the western part, most had been Arian Christians for more than a century.
The conflict in the 4th century had seen Arian and Nicene factions struggling for control of the Church. In contrast, in the Arian German kingdoms established on the wreckage of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, there were entirely separate Arian and Nicene Churches with parallel hierarchies, each serving different sets of believers. The Germanic elites were Arians, and the majority population Nicene.
The Franks were unique among the Germanic peoples in that they entered the empire as pagans and converted to Nicene Christianity directly.
"ARİAN" AS A POLEMİCAL EPITHET
Like the Arians, many groups have embraced the belief that Jesus is not the one God, but a separate being subordinate to the Father, and that Jesus at one time did not exist. Some of these profess, as the Arians did, that God made all things through the pre-existent Christ. Some profess that Jesus became divine, through exaltation, just as the Arians believed. Drawing a parallel between these groups and Arians can be useful for distinguishing a type of unbelief in the Trinity.
Those whose religious beliefs have been compared to or labeled as Arianism include:
*Unitarians, who believe that God is one as opposed to a Trinity, and many of whom believe in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus. Arianism is considered to be an antecedent of Unitarian Universalism.
*Jehovah's Witnesses, who do have some similar beliefs to Arius, namely, that Jesus had a pre-human existence as the Logos. However, Arius viewed the Holy Spirit as a person, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses do not attribute personality to the spirit. Jehovah's Witnesses also, unlike Arians, deny belief in a disembodied soul after death, eternal punishment in hell for the unrepentantly wicked, and episcopacy.
*Christadelphians, along with the Church of the Blessed Hope, believe that Jesus' pre-natal existence was a conceptual Logos, rather than a literal Logos.
*Mormons, followers of the various churches of the Latter Day Saint movement, who believe in the unity in purpose of the Godhead but that Jesus is a divine being distinct from, and created by, God the Father, but similar in every other respect (thus roughly Homoiousian rather than Anomoean). Thus, Jesus is literally (spiritually) the Firstborn of the Father. Also in line with Arianism, Mormons believe that the pre-incarnate Jesus (the Logos of John 1) created the Earth under the direction of the Father. In fact, they go further than most on this point, equating the pre-existent Jesus with Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament (perhaps as a spokesman for the Father, for whom they reserve the Old Testament title Elohim). Although the LDS Church views the doctrinal schisms of the late Roman Empire as a sure sign of the Great Apostasy, they do not officially claim any allegiance to Arius.
*Muslims, who believe that Jesus (generally called Isa), was a Messenger and Prophet of the one God, but not himself divine.
*Michael Servetus, a Spanish scholar and Protestant reformer, is viewed by many Unitarians as a founding figure. In 1553, he was sentenced to death and burned at the stake by his fellow reformers, including John Calvin, for the heresy of Antitrinitarianism, a Christology that may seem similar in some ways to Arianism. However, Servetus rejected Arius's teaching on the Son being a creature created by the Father, and his theology was actually closer to Sabellianism.
*Unpublished writings by Isaac Newton indicate that he held anti-Trinitarian beliefs and regarded the worship of Jesus Christ as God to be idolatrous.[2] He did not publicize these views, which could have cost him his fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge, and has been described by modern scholars as a secret Arian.[3]
*Spanish liberation theologian Juan José Tamayo was accused in 2003 of defending "a renewed version of the old Arian error" which is "incompatible with the Catholic faith", by the Spanish Bishops' Commission for the Doctrine of the Faith, because of his theological positions published in several of his books about the relationship between Jesus and God the Father. Tamayo has up to now rejected the Bishops' demand to stop writing on this issue.[4]
THE THEOLOGİAN JUAN JOSE TAMAYO, ADMONİSHED BY İTS İNCOMPATİBLE İDEAS "WİTH THE CATHOLİC FAİTH"
ABC MADRID.
His book "God and Jesus", written by the secretary of the Association of Theologians and Theologians Juan XXIII, Juan Jose Tamayo Acosta, when considering that their conclusions "are incompatible with the catholic doctrine".
Frontal rejection of the tradition of the Church in its cristológicas definitions, arbitrary selection - not justified of passages of the New Testament with the express abandonment of others and interpretation of such according to confused criteria that do not specify ". In the same way,negation of the divinity of Jesus Christ, presentation of Jesus like a mere man, negation of the historical and real character of the resurrection, and this one like fundamental data of the Christian faith ".
THE THEOLOGICAL DEBATES REOPEN AFTER COUNCIL OF NICEA.
The Council of Nicea had not ended the controversy, as many bishops of the Eastern provinces disputed the homoousios, the central term of the Nicene creed, as it had been used by Paul of Samosata, who had advocated a monarchianist Christology. Both the man and his teaching, including the term homoousios, had been condemned by the Synods of Antioch in 269.
Hence, after Constantine's death in 337, open dispute resumed again. Constantine's son Constantius II, who had become Emperor of the eastern part of the Empire, actually encouraged the Arians and set out to reverse the Nicene creed.
Constantius used his power to exile bishops adhering to the Nicene creed, especially Athanasius of Alexandria, who fled to Rome. In 355 Constantius became the sole Emperor and extended his pro-Arian policy toward the western provinces, frequently using force to push through his creed.
As debates raged in an attempt to come up with a new formula, three camps evolved among the opponents of the Nicene creed.
The first group mainly opposed the Nicene terminology and preferred the term homoiousios (alike in substance) to the Nicene homoousios, while they rejected Arius and his teaching and accepted the equality and coeternality of the persons of the Trinity.
The second group also avoided invoking the name of Arius, but in large part followed Arius' teachings and, in another attempted compromise wording, described the Son as being like (homoios) the Father.
A third group explicitly called upon Arius and described the Son as unlike (anhomoios) the Father. Constantius wavered in his support between the first and the second party, while harshly persecuting the third.
The debates between these groups resulted in numerous synods, among them the Council of Sardica in 343, the Council of Sirmium in 358 and the double Council of Rimini and Selecia in 359, and no less than fourteen further creed formulas between 340 and 360, leading the pagan observer Ammianus Marcellinus to comment sarcastically: "The highways were covered with galloping bishops." None of these attempts were acceptable to the defenders of Nicene orthodoxy: writing about the latter councils, Saint Jerome remarked that the world "awoke with a groan to find itself Arian."
After Constantius' death in 361, his successor Julian, a devotee of Rome's pagan gods, declared that he would no longer attempt to favor one church faction over another, and allowed all exiled bishops to return; this had the objective of further increasing dissension among Christians. The Emperor Valens, however, revived Constantius' policy and supported the "Homoian" party, exiling bishops and often using force.
Valens died in the Battle of Adrianople in 378 and was succeeded by Theodosius I, who adhered to the Nicene creed. This allowed for settling the dispute.
Two days after Theodosius arrived in Constantinople, November 24, 380, he expelled the Homoian bishop. Theodosius had just been baptized, by bishop Acholius of Thessalonica, during a severe illness, as was common in the early Christian world. In February he and Gratian published an edict that all their subjects should profess the faith of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria (i.e., the Nicene faith), or be handed over for punishment for not doing so.
In 381, at the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople, a group of mainly Eastern bishops assembled and accepted the Nicene Creed of 381, which was supplemented in regard to the Holy Spirit, as well as some other changes, see Comparison between Creed of 325 and Creed of 381. This is generally considered the end of the dispute about the Trinity and the end of Arianism among the Roman, non-Germanic peoples.
Name:jsm •
Date: 04/07/07 16:17
A: roy,
I don't mind long posts, but when 90% of it is copied off of wikipedia I'd rather not have to read it. If you have something to say, say it in your own words. It really makes it look like you don't know what you believe when you copy others words.
Name:roy •
Date: 04/08/07 15:10
A: Jsm,
Critics are welcome. I am not historian or scientist to know it all. Please accept my appology, yet there are hours of simplification effort before I post any article.Thanks for reading
Name:jsm •
Date: 04/09/07 2:30
A: roy
I didn't mean to offend you, I would just prefer that you talk from what you know, from what you believe, from what you were taught in your own words. I mean theres nothing wrong with supplying a link if you'd like something for us to read as a site to your opinion, just being a scientist, I'd respect your opinion if it was your opinion. Just try not to post so much at one time, its just way to much for me to respond to. Might try breaking it down, maybe into a paragraph or two so we could retain everything and supply a more accurate answer. Like I said before I wasn't trying to offend you, so if you took it that way I'm sorry.
Name:light •
Date: 04/17/07 18:58
A: Also, no need to post the same thing in so many threads. Good effort though.
Name:ibiza618 •
Date: 05/13/07 5:42
A: I think that is your opinion. Science is science! Math proves 2 +2 =4 and DNA cannot be disputed. What astounds me above all arguments of whether this is indeed Jesus' family tomb and therein the remains of his body is this - who cares! If you're a Christian, then you've been bred, raised and taught that your faith is above all and if your faith tells you that there is that Supreme being that raised his son from the dead to ascend to Heaven, then so be it - believe in that and if that helps you sleep better at night be a productive, respectful human being, more power to you. However, in the realm of today's reality and modern science, the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran were all books written by MAN himself. The day someone can prove that these books, much less a single letter, were written by a finger of a higher entity (a.k.a. God) - then that will be a day to remember. Until then, these are all great stories told thru the centuries, but they're still books written by men and not God. What has been found in that tomb science proves thru DNA and otherwise that there was a MAN named Jesus of Nazareth and the existence of his family as it were. Prove to us all the same that EVERYTHING else in the above mentioned books is real (scientifically) and then we'll all listen to the holy rollers posting their, "Well pray for everyone, because we're going to need it." Or "Satan is testing us" crap!
