The Lost Tomb of Jesus at Talpiot

[colubridae]

and conduct debates with Christians?
.

That's a joke, right?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[quote="mistermack"]The duck said it all.
I'm amazed that a site for atheists showed so little interest in this tomb. [quote]
Just out of curiosity, why do think atheists would like to spend time arguing about religion? I, for one, have better things to do.

[mistermack]

Because the 'facts' seem pretty poor.

Hmm, I'm not with you there. The facts of the tomb are rock solid, virtually indesputable. The only facts I'm referring to from antiquity are the supposed names of Jesus's family. These come from the letters of Paul, and the Gospels. While there is surely huge invention in the stories, there is hardly likely to be invention of names. Possible, but highly unlikely.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Because the 'facts' seem pretty poor.

Hmm, I'm not with you there. The facts of the tomb are rock solid, virtually indesputable. The only facts I'm referring to from antiquity are the supposed names of Jesus's family. These come from the letters of Paul, and the Gospels. While there is surely huge invention in the stories, there is hardly likely to be invention of names. Possible, but highly unlikely.
.

What about studies that show the inscription was modified?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Archeological Identity Theft : The Lost Tomb of Jesus Fails to Make the Grade

[mistermack]

The duck said it all.
I'm amazed that a site for atheists showed so little interest in this tomb.

Just out of curiosity, why do think atheists would like to spend time arguing about religion? I, for one, have better things to do.

In that case, why bother to call yourself an atheist? Or visit an atheist site? Or write a reply to this?
I've got lots of better things to do, but they never get done!!
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The duck said it all.
I'm amazed that a site for atheists showed so little interest in this tomb.

Just out of curiosity, why do think atheists would like to spend time arguing about religion? I, for one, have better things to do.

In that case, why bother to call yourself an atheist? Or visit an atheist site? Or write a reply to this?
I've got lots of better things to do, but they never get done!!
.

Son, I was an atheist at age seven. Actually, I usually said, "I'm not religious enough to call myself an atheist." As far as I'm concerned all religious debates should be held in the center of a supernova. And anyone who disagrees with me can

[Pappa]

Because the 'facts' seem pretty poor.

Hmm, I'm not with you there. The facts of the tomb are rock solid, virtually indesputable. The only facts I'm referring to from antiquity are the supposed names of Jesus's family. These come from the letters of Paul, and the Gospels. While there is surely huge invention in the stories, there is hardly likely to be invention of names. Possible, but highly unlikely.
.

No, they are not. The inscriptions are disputed. Some experts don't even think it says Jesus.

[mistermack]

What about studies that show the inscription was modified?

Somebody produced a box, and tried to claim it was the missing one from the Tomb. That box was never accepted as genuine. It had "James, brother-of-Jesus" written on it, and it was studied and the conclusion was that the brother-of-Jesus bit was added later, by someone else.
But that box plays no part in the story, it's not part of the discovery.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

What about studies that show the inscription was modified?

Somebody produced a box, and tried to claim it was the missing one from the Tomb. That box was never accepted as genuine. It had "James, brother-of-Jesus" written on it, and it was studied and the conclusion was that the brother-of-Jesus bit was added later, by someone else.
But that box plays no part in the story, it's not part of the discovery.
.

Into the fundy bin with you. :bye-bye:

[mistermack]

No, they are not. The inscriptions are disputed. Some experts don't even think it says Jesus.

Like I said, there are very good reasons for the Israelis to rubbish this, and you will always find an 'expert' to try it on.
No unbiased person could find that. Even I can see it says Jesus.
If you look at some of the arguments made against it, it's very clear they are mostly manufactured, and distortions. The biggest distortion of all was saying "ah but Mary was an extremely common name" when It is clearly written Mariah.
Anyone who can make that argument clearly has an agenda.
Most of the arguments against this are equally laughable, when you actually look at them.

They actually argue that Jesus would have been buried in Galillee, even though it's many days travel away, and bodies had to be buried within a day. Stuff like that, that shows there is an agenda to rubbish this, and not to let the truth get in the way.
.

[mistermack]

Into the fundy bin with you. :bye-bye:

You obviously can't read. Or can't be bothered to read. Either way, you're not worth reading.
bye bye.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

As Jesus never existed, the issue is moot.

[Pappa]

No, they are not. The inscriptions are disputed. Some experts don't even think it says Jesus.

Like I said, there are very good reasons for the Israelis to rubbish this, and you will always find an 'expert' to try it on.
No unbiased person could find that. Even I can see it says Jesus.

Well, if not caring either way is unbiased, then I'm unbiased and I can't see that it clearly says Jesus in the inscription. I would go as far as saying it is clearly ambiguous.

[mistermack]

There you are pappa, Gawdzill thinks that Jesus never existed. You didn't have to wait long.
And Gawdzilla, why are you linking an extreme Christian site to refute this? Are you that gullible?
.