They Found Jesus' Body!!!

Yes that is true, and the religions who used hallucinogenics were occultic in nature. These religions were more associated with the darkside.

 

I'm not to big on organized religion myself, however I do have a list for you if the link works.

http://www.messiahrevealed.org/

If this link works then click on category, then at the end of that list click on INDEX OF ALL. Good number of the prophecies to be found there. According to Jews for Jesus, they say there are actually 365 prophecies to be found in the Old Testament that speak of Jesus Christ.

If this link does not work, you could just try a Search and type in, 300 prophecies Jesus Christ. The are a lot of sites that talk about these prophecies.

 

God also made plants that produce poison, yet God never incouraged us to smoke them. God does incourage His people to be sober, and to think with clear minds. Sometimes there is a fine line between useing and abusing.

 

So god wants us never high, never drunk, never having sex before marriage, never to masturbate......

Sounds more like a life of slavery then a gift.

 

Well lets see why would God be against getting drunk? Maybe the fact that 25,000 people die in America alone just because of drunk driving? And not to mention all the other ills associated with this kind of thing.

Sex before marriage, whats the big deal there? Maybe the fact that America tossed 50 million babies back in Gods face by abortion, because we want the sex but not the kids? And lets not forget the millions around the globe who are dieing because of the kind of diseases being spread by such a free lifestyle.

Getting high, whats the problem there, maybe the fact that it often leads to stronger drugs, that sometimes ends a best friends life.

The Bible teaches us that the servant of sin is the slave to sin. God is doing all He can do to protect our lives, the world is doing all it can do to end it.

 

And yet we do these things because God gave us free will.

 

That is correct, and the Bible tells us that the people of this world love evil more than good. Yet with free will you can make the choice to serve God or serve yourself.

 

So to mash the two topics, do you believe it is evil to seek out the body of Christ? I'm not saying that the tomb and the ossuaries found in Jerusalem are His, nor am I asking if you believe they are, just if it is evil for Christians (and they are Christians) to seek the final resting place and remains of Jesus.

 

I think some might consider a Christian looking for the body of Christ in a tomb would be a demonstration of a lack of faith, yet having a lack of faith has never been described as evil. And remember, this would not be the first time Christians went looking for the body of Christ in a tomb. The Bible tells us we should prove all things, so I believe not to investigate would be a big mistake. If one believes the Bible to be true, then no challenge to it should ever be ignored.

 

Excuse me. Not trying to make changes to the flow of the thread, as this really shouldn't be asserted as such an attempt, but I just cannot believe this statement was really made by one who thinks that parroting others quotes and words would constitute proof.

Proving all things is not parroting what someone else 'said', either verbally or written, but taking investigative evidence as was presented to the audience in the documentary. Not once did they appear in front of a camera and spout off at the mouth things they read or believed from some one elses written or verbal source. They presented evidence from scientific sources. Albiet most of the data was profferred disconnectedly, it followed the outline and flow of the documentary as the director saw fit to provide.

I still stick to my idea, albiet without proof, that DNA testing was already done on all the bones in each of the ossuaries because it was never denied nor refuted that it was or was not done, just that evidence was never reported as such to the viewer.

If the author of that 'quote' above decides to reply back to this particular post, I'll not reply but then it doesn't really matter one bit my ideas as such in regards to the topic of this thread. The purpose of this post was one out of bewilderment that the author would make such radical statements and not abide by them. And like I mentioned, parroting is not proof. Quoting others words and statements is not proof. Evidence is proof ... and evidence is not words on a piece of paper ...

The author's [of the above quote] inconsistent chatter is really giving me a super headache ...

HTML:

HTML:

HTML:

 

We have had the 'Opposite Problem' in certain periods of history where Christians went full out to find every single relic, artifact and shrine any place of event.
Actually.. that in itself is no problem and is a good thing and we could also thank the early Christians for pioneering what is now modern day Archeology.
But,
Its thought they got carried away just like Jacobovici has - jumping the gun and declaring anything 'close enough' to be 'the official site'.
Then again,
They probably had the benefit of being just a few hundred years away from the actual events and better fact finding than Cameron and Jacobivici seemed to have;

The 'Official' Tomb of Jesus since around 380AD has been:
The Holy Sepulchre:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Holy_Sepulchre

Christian Archeaologists have been making tremendous discoveries for quite a while now.
Bib-Arch is a good resource: http://www.bib-arch.org/

 

Oh my me ... not another wikipedia quote ...

Just as much as I can't believe that anyone would actually parrot others quotes and writings and present them as proof, I can't also believe that people actually take wikipedia as a reliable source of information ... convenient, perhaps ... reliable, NOT ... !!!

What does this have to do with finding Jesus' body (err... bones)?

HTML:

HTML:

HTML:

 

Well sometimes it's hard for the average person to travel to the Middle East to prove a point, and often if a source has gone before and makes a discovery, and one feels he's a source that is considered reliable, you can use such. Sometimes a piece of paper with words on it is what is used in a court of law, and is considered evidence.

 

I cringe at Wikipedia myself but you might have noticed that the Holy Sepulchre is a place.
Its like a Wiki on 'The Houston Astrodome' or 'The Taj Mahal' in that its a 'thing'.

http://www.christusrex.org/www1/ofm/TSspmain.html
or
http://www.bibleplaces.com/holysepulcher.htm
or
http://www.mustardseed.net/html/pjrusepd.html
or,
If you like I have tourist friends with lots of pictures and video of their visit to the Holy Sepulchre.

Well since this is a topic about WHERE JESUS WAS BURIED it was asked if Christians had ever thought to look for the place themselves.

Jeepers, why is everything so 'confusing' for you DarrellK??

 

It was not incorrect, the addition of the James ossuary changed it from 600 to 30 000 to one, is what the statistics and mathematics teacher claimed. I don't claim to know which is right, but I do know that he said, if the James one matches it is a slam dunk.
Divinity is everywhere, imho, though I can see great doubt in everything too. Cheers

 

Skip, I agree, the church leaders very often spread misinformation, and are very misleading in their interpretations of scripture in their pursuit of personal goals. Money, prestige, power, and security are my bets for the most popular ones. It was a Jewish friend who once called Christianity Paulianity, since he felt Paul was the founder of it, and not Jesus.
Jesus seems to be the only Jew that Christians like.
If those bones really are Joseph, Mary, James, Martha, and Jesus, etc. bones, then I see that as the best evidence found that support that Jesus was not just a fictional creation. It also supports my personal theory that the best explanation for the empty tomb and sightings of Jesus after he was crucified is that he wasn't dead when they took him down off the cross, but was just unconscious. It seems much more plausible to me than the theory he died, then came back to life.
It is abhorrent to many to suggest Jesus may have experienced some aspects of human life such as marriage, and even more repellent to them, had sex. That is hard for me to understand, as I feel that even accepting that he was God in the flesh, why would he be selective in his human experiences? He was said one reason he was here was so that he could know what it means to experience human mortal lives. That would be odd to exclude certain parts, if one of his goals was for the human experience to be known better.
If Jesus descendants existed, and if today Jesus' descendants still do, then that may be seen by the church as a threat, which could harm their powerbase if widely accepted as being the case. Plus, they don't like the idea that he was taken down from the cross alive, because the whole 'died so his blood washed away our sins' thing becomes tenuous at best.

 

Interesting how people of all faiths are saying that it's not the bones of Jesus, but each group is saying it for different reasons.

As for my two cents, I don't know who it is, but it's not Jesus.