Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


hypothetical science question

   
on the other claw: this would suggest that teh historical accuracy of such claims stretch credulity.
The evidence offere here certainly offers testimony that the early christians did believe in Jesus as a real person (including details of his execution), though of course those authors would be unable to verify the accuracy of that belief (and the traditions of the time did not include siting references if they did access any records which have since been lost)

As a side note, as a Geographer/Geologist and some one who makes there living from science. (And Jewish)
I would like to just say that the entire ideal of using "science" to try and do anything for a religious study gives me a ulcer.

There are after all religous groups. (Quite allot of them in the Christian camp) That believe that carbon dating is always wrong. (Not relising you cant carbon date a coalminers helmet because its covered in Carbon) And who ether don't believe in the basic ideals of Genetics. (As some one already pointed out) You can believe in genetics and Creationism, but by definition you are saying that Genetics don't work the way that scientists say they do.

So even if a way was found to say something about a tomb one way or the other, it would not matter, believers would still believe, doubter would still doubt. And Scientists would still be shit on and talked about like dogs by the far right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackstarraven View Post
As a side note, as a Geographer/Geologist and some one who makes there living from science. (And Jewish)
I would like to just say that the entire ideal of using "science" to try and do anything for a religious study gives me a ulcer.

There are after all religous groups. (Quite allot of them in the Christian camp) That believe that carbon dating is always wrong. (Not relising you cant carbon date a coalminers helmet because its covered in Carbon) And who ether don't believe in the basic ideals of Genetics. (As some one already pointed out) You can believe in genetics and Creationism, but by definition you are saying that Genetics don't work the way that scientists say they do.

So even if a way was found to say something about a tomb one way or the other, it would not matter, believers would still believe, doubter would still doubt. And Scientists would still be shit on and talked about like dogs by the far right.
I don't think this was meant to be a hypothetical religious study. It would also be interesting from a scientific point of view to what extend Jesus existed, or how a religion is created.

Your last remark is spot on.

Ya I get that, I'm just saying the question itself seams to give me a bad taste in my mouth.

And ya from a Social Science stand point it would be very interesting.
I don't know if most of you know this. (And I am not trying to convert anyone)
But the Roman's / Hebrews of the time Have basically no recode of Jesus at all. It's not until about 2-3 hundred years latter that anything physical pops up. This also kind of co-ops with the council of nicea comes about. A meeting of religion men to decide WHAT WOULD AND WOULD NOT BE EXCEPTED IN CHRISTIAN FAITH. They left books out, changed books. And basically shaped religious dogma in the Christian Faith.

A discovery like the one above would be interesting, but again would not do much. There are already a bunch of "Tombs" out there. Really any concrete evidence putting Jesus were he should be would be big.

i think part of the issue here is an overlaping of realms, in that it is so important to teh theology of so many Christians that the bible, and especially the new testement, be litterally true. There are theories that myths of Odin, Dionysis, King Arthur, and a great many others may have been based on real people, but no religion- modern or ancient, is dependnant upon that possibility. There ave been srudies showing that the Israelites probably never actually lived in Egypt proper, but this does not derail anyone's faith in Judaism, because the stories are about more than just a historical record, and well there is a lot more to the egypt story as well involving ancient poltics.
But where one religion stands out by insisting it's claims are litterally true, that begs, to many minds, for scientific inquiry. On teh other hand I have met a Methodist minister who openly states that the story of Jesus from the bible could not possibly be true, but that he teaches the myth and deeper meanings of christianity, so maybe in an odd way the scientific inquiry is leading to a more spiritual approach for at least some Christians...

Ya I would totally agree with that Silveroak.

And that's kind of what I am getting at, The question posed in the thread is interesting but utterly pointless.
If you want everything about the new testimant to be true, then you most likely should not pay much attention to science. Or any religion and science really. Most of my issue with Christianity isn't even based on that. Because Like you stated most of the old testimant has little backing or is counter to what we know.

And what it comes down to is that Most Jewish people, Myself included, don't go around trying to use Science to back there arguments, or even really bother with the ideal, Most of our faiths are not based on the ideal that it happened that way. It's based on the more Metaphysical aspects of the text.

But all religions are inconsistent. Some more then others. Ever notice that Christians pay attention to the 10 commandments and gripe about gay married but don't pay any attention to any other rules in the old testimant. Don't see allot of Christians with beards. (Sense being clean shaven is forbidden in the line after the one about gays) And when they do (Amish) The other Christians say they are "Not Christian"

But now I'm... or we are off topic I guess.

It is a interesting hypothetical question, but really the whole thing would just be a debocal, and any real knowledge that could be gained would be lost in the sea of stupid.

As has been pointed out, if it were a divine Jesus in the tomb, well, we wouldn't have no Jesus in the tomb, would we? So we're already presumably looking at a purely human specimen, if one is found. But I have no idea how one would do genetic testing and verify his lineage, considering we have no idea what we're looking for...

You'd get DNA (usually teeth are the best bet for this age), sequence mitochondrial DNA and then compare to samples from modern day residents in the area. And all that would really give you is degree of relationship to the bones in the tomb. Now whose bones are they... that is the real question.

I don't see any way that you could prove anything beyond a degree of relationship of certain individuals to the bones in the tomb. Scientists would say "it proves nothing," believers would say "of course it proves nothing" and we would be right back to where we started from... except maybe some fanatics would now start claiming degrees of relation to Jesus... I can totally see cults forming where degree of relationship to Jesus is a criteria for entrance. Now THERE is a movie!

After Jesus was crucified and died, He was resurrected from the dead and, after appearing to his friends, He was taken from them into a cloud, into paradise.

Matthew, chap. 27,

57 When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea named Joseph, who was himself a disciple of Jesus.

58 He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus; then Pilate ordered it to be handed over.

59 Taking the body, Joseph wrapped it (in) clean linen

60 and laid it in his new tomb that he had hewn in the rock. Then he rolled a huge stone across the entrance to the tomb and departed.

Chap. 28,

1 After the sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.

2 And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, approached, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it.

3 His appearance was like lightning and his clothing was white as snow.

...

5 Then the angel said to the women in reply, "Do not be afraid! I know that you are seeking Jesus the crucified.

6 He is not here, for he has been raised just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.

7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples, 'He has been raised from the dead, and he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him.' Behold, I have told you."

Acts, Chap 1,

6 When they had gathered together they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"

7 He answered them, "It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by his own authority.

8 But you will receive power when the holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, throughout Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

9 When he had said this, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him from their sight.

10 While they were looking intently at the sky as he was going, suddenly two men dressed in white garments stood beside them.

11 They said, "Men of Galilee, why are you standing there looking at the sky? This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will return in the same way as you have seen him going into heaven."

12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a sabbath day's journey away.





I hope it will help you in your research





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status