err... i missed this show. did they show the bones of jesus? did they find the holes in his feet and hands? i think that would pretty much settle the debate, wouldn't it?
no...there were no bones. and, no...i don't believe it would settle the debate. crucifixion was used quite a bit and Jesus was an EXTREMELY common name in a culture that employed far fewer names than we have today.
I don't think he ever said that, even in the documentary, it seemed to be the documentary people saying that the name could mean Mary Magdeline. And it could ! DD
But it they had the bones and there were holes in his hands and feet, then it would make the math that much more convincing. DD
DaDa, After your past couple of posts in this thread, I thought your sig could use some modification.
No, it would make the bones obvious forgeries - nobody got crucified through their hands - no way they could support the weight of the body. Spikes went through the wrists, between bones. Max - couldn't I get some "community outreach" royalties? I would take some outreaching to my front lawn or housekeeping. For the good of the community, you know.
Actually serious here. When they crucified people, most of the time they just hung em up and didn't nail em down. They could have done that to Jesus too...... DD
not most of the time in first centruy palestine, they didn't. josephus talks about this as well. i believe there are some letters that talk about how pilate never used ropes but always made sure his prisoners were nailed in. believe it or not, this was seen as merciful...because if they were merely tied up, it would generally take DAYS, not hours, for them to die.
Cameron's Jesus tomb debunked The other day I wrote about the manufactured circus surrounding the discovery of a cave reportedly containing the ossuaries of Jesus, Mary, and Mary Magdalene. The scientific evidence is to be presented not in an academic journal but on a Discovery Channel TV special this Sunday. Unsurprisingly, archaeologists all over the world are starting to speak out. William Dever is one of them and his comments in a Washington Post article pretty much sum up my feelings as well: "I'm not a Christian. I'm not a believer. I don't have a dog in this fight," said William G. Dever, who has been excavating ancient sites in Israel for 50 years and is widely considered the dean of biblical archaeology among U.S. scholars. "I just think it's a shame the way this story is being hyped and manipulated." Dever goes on to comment: "I've know about these ossuaries for many years and so have many other archaeologists, and none of us thought it was much of a story, because these are rather common Jewish names from that period," he said. "It's a publicity stunt, and it will make these guys very rich, and it will upset millions of innocent people because they don't know enough to separate fact from fiction." Jodi Magness, a UNC-Chapel Hill archaeologist as quoted in the same Post article: [Magness] expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said. http://www.anthroblogs.org/nomadicthoughts/archives/2007/02/camerons_jesus_1.html
They could have also used their Martian technology and lifted a pyramid on top of him. Yay, talking history is fun!
From Wikipedia "In popular depictions of crucifixion (possibly derived from a literal reading of the translated description in the Gospel of John, of Jesus' wounds being 'in the hands'), the condemned is shown supported only by nails driven straight through the feet and the palms of the hands. This is possible only if the condemned was also tied to the cross by ropes, or if there was a foot-rest or a sedile to relieve the weight: on their own, the hands could not support the full body weight, because there are no structures in the hands to prevent the nails from ripping through the flesh due to the weight of the body." Carry on.... DD
Picasso's paintings of people made them look like a jacked up kigsaw puzzle, does that mean that's what they looked like? the entry is specifically talking about wrongly DEPICTED crucificions, not the actual thing itself. as for myself, i've seen plenty of depictions of Christ on the cross with a footstep.
I love your "carry on..." part as if you schooled us. So some random dude who contributed to wiki says that if he was nailed through the hands he would have had to be supported by also being tied? No kidding. Great information there since we already know one's body could not be supported. That is more convincing than archaeological evidence from bones from that time and location proving (combined with written histories) that it was most often large nails through the wrist? PS - I see you ignored my position that a pyramid was dropped on him. You are a coward and thus I must be right.
i misunderstood...i thought you were saying he was tied up and not nailed down at all. that's why i pointed out what happened in first century palestine when people, particuarly jews, were crucified.
