The Lost Tomb of Jesus at Talpiot

[colubridae]

But if you read wikipedia on it, or any other current rejection, you will read arguments that are patently bogus, many of them downright ludicrous, and you have to ask 'why?'.
.

'why ask why?'

'why ask at all?'

'why of why?'

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Jesus had many hundreds of followers, if not thousands

How can you possibly know that's true?

I don't claim to know it's true, it's a reasonable inference. Firstly from what Paul wrote and secondly, by the fact that he was worth executing. And thirdly by the rapid growth of the cult. It had to start from some sort of following.
Anyway, it would only take half a dozen to start a tomb off, so it's not important.
.

So, you prove Jesus was Jesus by books about Jesus?

[Feck]

I find it strange that we think we can find someone as insignificant as Jebus but Alexander ? or Ghenghis or lots of really important people whose graves are missing ,Jebus was so important NO Roman records of him can be found! but we can find his tomb .......Meh don't believe it

[mistermack]

I find it strange that we think we can find someone as insignificant as Jebus but Alexander ? or Ghenghis or lots of really important people whose graves are missing ,Jebus was so important NO Roman records of him can be found! but we can find his tomb .......Meh don't believe it

Ok, but your own statement contains it's own refutal. Jesus was not important to the romans at the time. He seems to have posed enough of a threat or irritation to the Jewish establishment, for them to have him executed.
And you say he was so unimportant, it's unlikely his tomb would turn up. So in that case, this tomb is of someone even less important. It's self contradictory.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I find it strange that we think we can find someone as insignificant as Jebus but Alexander ? or Ghenghis or lots of really important people whose graves are missing ,Jebus was so important NO Roman records of him can be found! but we can find his tomb .......Meh don't believe it

Ok, but your own statement contains it's own refutal. Jesus was not important to the romans at the time. He seems to have posed enough of a threat or irritation to the Jewish establishment, for them to have him executed.
And you say he was so unimportant, it's unlikely his tomb would turn up. So in that case, this tomb is of someone even less important. It's self contradictory.
.

You can't prove the tomb is important because A tomb was found. Try harder, you're getting boring.

[Robert_S]

Jesus had many hundreds of followers, if not thousands

How can you possibly know that's true?

I don't claim to know it's true, it's a reasonable inference. Firstly from what Paul wrote and secondly, by the fact that he was worth executing. And thirdly by the rapid growth of the cult. It had to start from some sort of following.
Anyway, it would only take half a dozen to start a tomb off, so it's not important.
.

So, you prove Jesus was Jesus by books about Jesus?

If you have Jesus and not Jesus, logic will break down and we'll have packs of chavs and frat-boys dividing by zero on the streets.

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you have Jesus and not Jesus, logic will break down and we'll have packs of chavs and frat-boys dividing by zero on the streets.

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

The logic breaks down before that, at the point where we ask "is this guy a god?"

[Robert_S]

If you have Jesus and not Jesus, logic will break down and we'll have packs of chavs and frat-boys dividing by zero on the streets.

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

The logic breaks down before that, at the point where we ask "is this guy a god?"

That has a logical answer. He was not me, therefore he was not God.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you have Jesus and not Jesus, logic will break down and we'll have packs of chavs and frat-boys dividing by zero on the streets.

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

The logic breaks down before that, at the point where we ask "is this guy a god?"

That has a logical answer. He was not me, therefore he was not God.

[Robert_S]

If you have Jesus and not Jesus, logic will break down and we'll have packs of chavs and frat-boys dividing by zero on the streets.

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

The logic breaks down before that, at the point where we ask "is this guy a god?"

That has a logical answer. He was not me, therefore he was not God.

Oh, so you disbelieve in a God that slavishly follows logics. I deny the existence of a mightier and more glorious god who need not follow the rules of logic. I am also that god and I do not exist... except in bed.


But back on track. I think it would be a great thing if the bones of that Jesus impostor were unearthed.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Oh, so you disbelieve in a God that slavishly follows logics. I deny the existence of a mightier and more glorious god who need not follow the rules of logic. I am also that god and I do not exist... except in bed.


But back on track. I think it would be a great thing if the bones of that Jesus impostor were unearthed.

I'd love to do some DNA testing on the corpsicle. (And we could cancel Easter too.)

[Feck]

I find it strange that we think we can find someone as insignificant as Jebus but Alexander ? or Ghenghis or lots of really important people whose graves are missing ,Jebus was so important NO Roman records of him can be found! but we can find his tomb .......Meh don't believe it

Ok, but your own statement contains it's own refutal. Jesus was not important to the romans at the time. He seems to have posed enough of a threat or irritation to the Jewish establishment, for them to have him executed.
And you say he was so unimportant, it's unlikely his tomb would turn up. So in that case, this tomb is of someone even less important. It's self contradictory.
.

He wasn't"Important" Enough for the romans to execute him ..they didn't give a shit the jewish Authorities said this guy is causing trouble so the romans killed him .... they killed people for amusement FFS . Jewish Rebel linked to the anti roman resistance Got NAILED ....big deal

[Gawdzilla Sama]

He seems to have posed enough of a threat or irritation to the Jewish establishment, for them to have him executed.

Religious zealots of today should take note.

[mistermack]

There might have been a Jesus or maybe not. I think it's more probable that there was a guy who preached and then legends grew out of it than they made it ALL up.

Agreed, except for the word ALL. I can't see why they would make the names up.
These people did actually believe in the stuff, to the extent that the cult grew extremely quickly. It's extremely unlikely that the names in the stories would be changed. I would say that most of what's in the gospels is invention, but based on and grown out of a real man, with real followers.
Probably a Charles Manson type of charismatic loonie.
And I still think the odds are, it's his bones that were found.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's extremely unlikely that the names in the stories would be changed.

They changed Apollonius to Jesus, why not the rest of them?