16 Mar 05
Originally posted by StarrmanI don't know, but I can't imagine that the Romans would have kept records of this sort of thing. To them Jesus was just a criminal, like any other. I don't suppose they'd care much about where Jesus' body went.
But not much help here, as it is just a story. Does anyone know of any documented Roman history covering this period? Can we find any evidence of Jesus' cruxifiction and burial anywhere except the bible?
I would guess the answer is something like 'A big hole with all the others'
16 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by genius
jesus was not a strong man and so the cross would most likely have killed him...
For one. Yes I'm new and I registered just to reply to this. I know that Jesus rose from the dead to fulful the prophesis. He appeared to over 200 people, not just his disciples, before we went up to heaven.
And... Jesus was a carpenter. Why do you say he was not strong? He was likely ripped. The cross killed him so quickly (3 hours) because he gave his life.
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by CoconutDude, this is a chess site, don't you think you should play some chess before you head over to see what the forums are about?
For one. Yes I'm new and I registered just to reply to this. I know that Jesus rose from the dead to fulful the prophesis. He appeared to over 200 people, not just his disciples, before we went up to heaven.
And... Jesus was a carpenter. Why do you say he was not strong? He was likely ripped. The cross killed him so quickly (3 hours) because he gave his life.
But while you are here, have you got any information that can help us further the debate? If not, why are you here? The position of resident witnesser is already taken.
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by StarrmanWhy must it be apart from the Bible? Can you elaborate on your fantastical conspiracy theory that these men wanted to lie and later died for this lie?
Can anyone provide any cited sources of information [b]apart from the bible that give us any ideas about what occurred?[/b]
The Shroud of Turin is also rather interesting.
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by GENGARThere are more holes in this than in my 10 year old socks.
the body of the Lord is said to be buried at Mount Cor in France, this
is based on the idea that Joseph of Arimethia had helped the Christ
leave for France...that the Christ survived the 3 hours on the cross
( most prisoners were left for a full day ) and that when his folllowers
were taking aloe to the tomb it was evidence that he was alive in
the tomb ...[text shortened]... order to stamp out this heretical history...this story is in
the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail..
First of all, I believe I might call Dan Brown and tell him you stole his story line which he in turn stole from someone else.
Secondly, both the Romans and Jews had a vested interest in guarding the tomb, since there were rumors that this troublemaker would raise from the dead (they thought the disciples would steal the body). It is highly unlikely that they would allow the possibility of the disciples stealing the body and causing them more trouble. Not to mention the Jews later wrote that A. the guards were asleep or B. the guards were paid.
Thirdly, the reason Jesus died in such a short time was because He was FLOGGED beforehand. His blood loss was insane. He would have died even had He not been crucified.
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by StarrmanThe authors mentioned the name of Joseph of Arimethia. This was either a huge error or the truth. He was a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin (council of high priests) and therefore could have been contacted quite easily to see whether the tomb was empty.
But not much help here, as it is just a story. Does anyone know of any documented Roman history covering this period? Can we find any evidence of Jesus' cruxifiction and burial anywhere except the bible?
Though I suppose no early Christian felt the urge to view in awe the place of their Lord's resurrection from the dead?
16 Mar 05
2 edits
Originally posted by DarfiusDarfius, you may have noticed this is not the spiritual forum. We are debating what happened to Jesus' body in non-spiritual terms. If you wish to take part fine, but please keep your witnessing out of here.
Why must it be apart from the Bible? Can you elaborate on your fantastical conspiracy theory that these men wanted to lie and later died for this lie?
The Shroud of Turin is also rather interesting.
I was trying to establish a cross referencing source of information. As no-one has yet come up with anything apart from the bible, we have yet to have this cross-referencing. I was not making any statement on the validity of its claims. Now, do you have anything to contribute here other than your religious whaffle?
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by Starrmanwell-it's a highly spiritual matter, as if the tomb was empty then there is no other feasible explanation other than he was the son of god. and just because it's not the spirituality forum, doesn't mean you can't talk about christianity here. i mean-i wouldn't call christainity "spiritualism". heck-i wouldn't even call it a religion! it's more than that, it's more than meerly a beleif.
Darfius, you may have noticed this is not the spiritual forum. We are debating what happened to Jesus' body in non-spiritual terms. If you wish to take part fine, but please keep your witnessing out of here.
I was trying to establish a cross referencing source of information. As no-one has yet come up with anything apart from the bible, we have yet t ...[text shortened]... of its claims. Now, do you have anything to contribute here other than your religious whaffle?
and i did a google search earlier and found a few unbiased sources that mention jesus from the decades after his death, but i've not got time to post them as i'm about to flee for my dinner...but yeah-just do a google...
16 Mar 05
Originally posted by sasquatch672No offense, SQ. Just, as I said, confusion. -Del
Del, I appear to have offended you and for that I apologize. I believe it was Brother Edwin, or perhaps it was that old standby, RBHILL, that said that the Catholic Mary is satanic. Make no mistake about it, Jesus and I are mates. I also said at the end of the post, "He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father." I meant that. I'm Catholic.
19 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Brother EdwinMore proof of Jesus than Julius Ceaser?
This is not a spiritality duscussion it is historical fact.
First we have more proof of Jesus than of Julious Ceaser. Se he did exist for the purpose of this duscussion.
.
There are no definite dates of a birth and death for Jesus of Nazereth. There are no records of his early life, and the last five years are recorded by his followers thirty to a hundred years after his death. There certainly were plenty of men called Jesus at this time but no record of a Jesus of Nazereth in any source document.
Julius Ceaser is recorded in historical records, document and even coins from the perod he lived in.
So how do you justify this claim?
19 Mar 05
Originally posted by steerpikethe are both primary records and secondary records that document jesus of nathereth, you are meerly dismissing the primary ones as they are biased. this is not a good way of viewing things, as almost every source in existence is biased in some way or another...
More proof of Jesus than Julius Ceaser?
There are no definite dates of a birth and death for Jesus of Nazereth. There are no records of his early life, and the last five years are recorded by his followers thirty to a hundred years after his death. There certainly were plenty of men called Jesus at this time but no record of a Jesus of Nazereth in any s ...[text shortened]... ds, document and even coins from the perod he lived in.
So how do you justify this claim?
there was once a battle between france and england (or someone like that) where one side wrote they they won the battle, whilst the other said that they won it...
20 Mar 05
Originally posted by geniusHow would you prove George Washington existed? You go back to records produced during his lifetime - church records including a birth register, records of purchase of property, army pay records, letters written by him, contempary writings.This source material is not biased - it is a factual record of a birth. a death. or property changing hands. I think this is what you mean by primary evidence - and it exists for both Washington and Caeser, so we have no doubt of their existance.
the are both primary records and secondary records that document jesus of nathereth, you are meerly dismissing the primary ones as they are biased. this is not a good way of viewing things, as almost every source in existence is biased in some way or another...
there was once a battle between france and england (or someone like that) where one side wrote they they won the battle, whilst the other said that they won it...
So - where is this primary material from the lifetime of Jesus of Nazereth and where is it held?
20 Mar 05
So is no-one able to point out primary evidence for the exisistence of Jesus then?
If we are having a hard time agreeing that he even existed, we cannot then take steps to say he even died. If we can't say with any sureity he did live or die, how can we debate what happened to his body?
I had previously presumed that Jesus had lived and that there is primary evidence for his existence. Learning now that this may not be true leaves me stunned that someone could believe in him at all, let alone as the supernatural figurehead of a religion.
Can anyone point out primary evidence?