h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Chewy2

Ignore Ictoan - he's just a grumpy bunny. Welcome to the endless God-thread.

A starting question... which of the ten commandments do you follow, all, some, or just the one's you can remember?

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate .

it's true, it's true

Actually I was just trying to avoid rehashing the same old arguments. But I guess each person has to go through their own investigative process which usually starts with very similar statements and arguments. And, to be fair, there is some good stuff in this thread if you know what to look for so it is worth scanning through.

Thanks guys, I was just really answering the question from my point of view

I have read the posts in this thread and find them very interesting and informative.

I actually try and follow the full ten commandments, although in this day and age it is very hard as you have different people with different belief's living next and around you.

The one thing I do fail with in the eyes of God is living with someone and we are not married. But in my defense I did marry before living with my partner and had no sexual relations until we were married - another so say Christian - who was a hypocrite and wasn't a true Christian and also was a fraud, liar, cheater to me and his own family.

I don't profess to be perfect as no one is, but try my hardest to do unto others like I would done unto myself.

Here's a new something or other (I think it is) -
The bones labelled "Jesus son of Joseph". Could they, as claimed, be the Real McCoy?
I read in the paper that they are 2,000 years old and were found in Jerusalem.

Er.. no. From what I have read on diverse sites, not the real deal, not even close!

Vicky

Ah Della, but the fun things is this:
Either they aren't Jesus's bones and Christianity continues, or...
They are those of the 'historical' Jesus and Christianity ceases to exist.

Without the crucifixion, resurrection and ascension what is christianity? A fraud by a a pair of itinerant jewish conmen.

Am I looking forwards to this or what? The Da Vinci Code has created a horde of first century conspiracy nuts who'll turn this into a complete circus.

Sorry Della, hard times ahead for you pseudo-jews

Blessings,
Matholwch .

The possibility of them being Jesus's bones CANNOT be allowed. These CANNOT be the remains of "Jesus son of Joseph" (I believe that is basically what's written on the casket). The possibility CANNOT even be considered.
The remains MUST be of another person who had the name Jesus, and who had a parent with the name Jospeh. It MUST simply be a coincidence. That can be allowed. In fact it MUST be, otherwise the whole rigmarole will come crashing down faster than Samson's famous pillars.

Ah well, LL, and Matholwch - right here on Hootoo, I came across a link the other day, to a news item (The Toronto Star, possibly) in which an archaeologist with a tad more nous than James Cameron expresses a considerable amount of doubt about it all. Maybe you saw the link? It might have been the inaptly-named Moral Majority thread, or summat similar. Never mind, I will google for more..

And I have found it...

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23386857-details/I've+found+the+coffin+of+Jesus,+says+film+director/article.do

and this...

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/02/26/jesus-tomb.html

Vicky

doesn't really matter if they are or not - there's absolutly no way to tell. Unless there's some Merovingian willing to give their DNA

You are correct Lucky, it will not be allowed. However, every headline, every little nibble around the edges of the core tenets of christianity weakens it further.

The Church will trot out a long series of highly qualified experts to pour scorn on any challenge to the authenticity of Jesus' life.

I remember the fury I endured when I first deconstructed the crucifixion online from the point of view of a rational historian. I was called every name under the sun and 'blasphemer' was one of the mildest.

Ho hum...

Blessings,
Matholwch .

Thanks for the links Vicky. You can't destroy a 2,000 year tradition with a film of a few old bones. That would take a real miracle!

Math,
A guy on that link says that it says in the Bible that 500 people saw Jesus alive after he was crucified. Well, if that's the case then it must slightly increase the chances of these being 'the' bones. Because if he survived the cross we can hardly expect to find his bones in the original burial can we?

'original burial site' that shoul read.

It seems to me they want to have their cake and eat it. They say it can't be him because he was buried in the Joseph of Arimethea grave in the Garden. And then they say he was alive a few days later. Well if they say that they are demolishing their own argument.

If they said ok Joseph of Arimethea probably took the body to a secret location and then out of the Holy Land in one of his ships and buried it somewhere between there and Glastonbury then I'd probably say ok it can't be the Real McCoy bones. But since they don't say that then the possibility that they are the Real McCoy bones will always hang over them like a black cloud. And that will be a small problem.

At the end of the day whether it is Jesus's burial place or not, I don't think it will make much different to religions as people are forgetting that Jesus was a human being like the rest of us and even though he died on the cross and was buried and rose again, he must have been buried again and whats to say if wasn't with his father, Joseph.

*According to the Israel Antiquities Authority, six of those coffins were marked with the names Mary; Matthew; Jesua son of Joseph; Mary; Jofa (Joseph, Jesus' brother); and Judah son of Jesua.

James Cameron said statistical tests and DNA analysis backed this view.

But Mr Cameron's claim has been attacked by archaeologists and theologians as unfounded. Archaeologists said that the burial cave was probably that of a Jewish family with similar names to that of Jesus.

But Mr Cameron said the combination of names found on the tombs convinced him of their heritage.

Israeli construction workers building an apartment complex in Jerusalem's East Talpiot district first uncovered 10 of the 2,000-year-old ossuaries - or limestone coffins - in a tomb in March 1980.

* taken from the BBC News Website - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6397373.stm?ls

We as human beings are constantly in search of the truth and scientific proof, and forget that sometimes we will never find the proof we need, therefore need to have faith and believe or not - God did infact give us "free will", so it is down to the individual.

http://www.carm.org/diff/Gen4_17.htm

Would any of you like to have a look at this and tell me if it is as lacking in sense as I think it is.

"The genetic lineage of Adam and Eve was perfect so marrying a sister wasn't going to cause birth defects."

Well later God says incest is wrong, fine. He is the bigG (allegedly) and as his creations we just have to go with what he says, right?

So are birth defects the only consideration, they appear to be the only reason the bigG wants incest stopped sinece he allowed it before when things were still perfect. Later obviously random mutations that those deceiful evolutionists latched onto would have meant minor abberations in genetic code could be concentrated with negative effects if people breed with people too close to themselves genetically.

Or is this just another example of the Bible being a self contradictory mess because its a cobbled together anthology of older traditional myths and legends that is no more truhful than "Alice in Wonderland", but not as much fun to read.

one love

"‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD," (Lev. 18:6).


hmmm okay define "Close relative" - did I read somewhere you can marry your cousins ????

Another thought for you to have a pedigree dog they have to come from the same family - perhaps thats why heinz dogs are healthier

The nonsense here is in the commentary rather than in the Bible, BB. The Law came later at the time of Moses: the Bible itself is clear on that.

Am I right in thinking that Joseph is from the family of David and that his wife Mary is from the family of Aaron?
And are theses different royal lineages or are they basically the same?
We see descendants of European royals who are not quite the full shilling, if I may put it that way, due to too much in-breeding and I'm tempted to wonder if it was like that in the Holy Land in Jesus's time.
As an aside I was wondering if Jesus hadn't calmed the sea, i.e. changed the world's weather patterns with a wave of his hand, if the iceberg would have just missed the Titanic all those years later - but that's a silly thought isn't it?

Hello LL

I think both Mary and Joseph are of the line of David - of course this is nearly a thousand years later. But the line goes all over the place, so whether they were closely related is another matter.

If chaos theory operates, you might be right about the Titanic! On the other hand, maybe the ship might have gone down with all hands.

I can almost picture the happy traditional family; the old woodcarver, the young dutiful wife, their 5 sons. Jesus was the eldest of the siblings was he?