Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
well, it sounds like having guests over was better than not and watching the doc. i was curious about what possible functions the dna sampling could have served, beyond adding an element of pseudo-science to this advertising delivery system. i had figured either:
(a) if the tomb was that of the jesus everyone thinks of when the name jesus is used in this kind of context that maybe there would be some kind of anomaly at the genetic structure level as a function of the halfsharkalligatorhalfman status jesus is said to have occupied--and the idea of there being a claim to have isolated strands of god-dna made me laugh...or
(b) it could be used for "identification" purposes, which seemed just bizarre: "this is definitely the right jesus and we have proven it using dna" made me wonder what that evidence could possibly be compared to. this, too, made me laugh.
but using it to establish relations amongst elements of a set the status of which remains indeterminate is i guess as far as you could really go with this kind of evidence and stay within rational bounds--tho i had hoped they wouldn't.
so if i understand the reactions to this advertising delivery system correctly, it provided much the same kind of infotainment as the "geraldo find al capone's safe" thing did.
that right?
|
Even so roach, I think we sort of owe it to ourselves to watch it even if it is bad in order to discuss it properly. Sort of intellectual honesty? After all, the OP is about the documentary so it sort of obligates us to give it a fair shake.
I think for me, as a person of faith, the establishment of the tombs validity would not deter my religious devotion. So, assuming the tomb is indeed that of Jesus Christ and family. Well, other than a slight geographical anomaly (already circumspect and unsure), I don't see much of a contradiction t the tenets of my religion's narrative.
Some alternate thoughts:
1. According to the Gospels, Christ rose after 3 days. Ok, well, the tomb/coffin is empty right? So in theory, if the body isn't there, then presumably he did rise and ascend to Heaven.
2. Maybe it's a ceremonial memorial coffin/tomb for JC long after the fact. I mean, the supposition is that his family is all buried there. Well, they could have fashioned a coffin for him as a stand in long after the events of the Bible. It isn't unheard of to move burial tracts is it?
3. I don't really see what the big deal is if JC was married to Madeline and had a son. I kind of like that story actually. It doesn't break my faith. I don't see how it could.
The only thing of the documentary (I have not seen it) that I would question is the "validity" or science/methodology of the work. James Cameron is a Hollywood director not a scholar or documentarian. Thus the sensationalized nature of his profession calls into question his credentials in context of a documentary like this one. That's just my opinion though.
Secondly, the set-up seems a bit off to me. Note, the outcome doesn't bother me, rather the method. It just seems a bit too convenient to find all these tombs in that way. The names etc. Almost like it was planned, or a hoax.
I think there needs to be more scrutiny, science, and scholarship involved before any pronouncements are made either way.