Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-26-2007, 03:25 PM   #1 (permalink)
Cosmically Curious
 
onodrim's Avatar
 
Location: Chicago, IL
Tomb of Jesus Discovered?

Quote:
Jesus Family Tomb Believed Found   click to show 

New scientific evidence, including DNA analysis conducted at one of the world's foremost molecular genetics laboratories, as well as studies by leading scholars, suggests a 2,000-year-old Jerusalem tomb could have once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth and his family.

The findings also suggest that Jesus and Mary Magdalene might have produced a son named Judah.

A documentary presenting the evidence, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," will premiere on the Discovery Channel on March 4 at 9 p.m. ET/PT. The documentary comes from executive producer James Cameron and director Simcha Jacobovici.
I found this article while browsing earlier and thought it was certainly worthy of discussion. It's definitely going to bring out strong reactions from people on all sides.

As far as I see it, I don't believe there's any way to prove this one way or the other. Even if they did find a 2,000 year old tomb containing coffins with those names, how can we know that is is actually Jesus and his descendants. We have no DNA to test against.

And if there is reason to believe it may be true, why wait to publish the news until a documentary is being filmed. Is it all one big publicity stunt?
__________________
"The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides"
-Carl Sagan

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 02-26-2007 at 03:32 PM..
onodrim is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 03:40 PM   #2 (permalink)
Submit to me, you know you want to
 
ShaniFaye's Avatar
 
Location: Lilburn, Ga
at best I can see how they might prove relationships to other's in the tomb...ie which of the bones were the parents of Judah, if joseph and mary's were the parents of Jesus

its interesting to see how the discovery site makes sure to explain how this discovery doesnt fly in the face of christian believe lol

Quote:
Resurrection: It is a matter of Christian faith that Jesus of Nazareth was resurrected from the dead three days after his crucifixion circa 30 C.E. This is a central tenet of Christian theology, repeated in all four Gospels. The Lost Tomb of Jesus does not challenge this belief. In the Gospel of Matthew (28:12) it states that a rumor was circulating in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ crucifixion. This story holds that Jesus' body was moved by his disciples from the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, where he was temporarily buried. Ostensibly, his remains were taken to a permanent family tomb. Though Matthew calls this rumor a lie circulated by the high priests, it appears in his Gospel as one of the stories surrounding Jesus’ disappearance from the initial tomb where he was buried. Even if Jesus' body was moved from one tomb to another, however, that does not mean that he could not have been resurrected from the second tomb. Belief in the resurrection is based not on which tomb he was buried in, but on alleged sightings of Jesus that occurred after his burial and documented in the Gospels.

Ascension: It is also a matter of Christian faith that after his resurrection, Jesus ascended to heaven. Some Christians believe that this was a spiritual ascension, i.e., his mortal remains were left behind. Other Christians believe that he ascended with his body to heaven. If Jesus’ mortal remains have been found, this would contradict the idea of a physical ascension but not the idea of a spiritual ascension. The latter is consistent with Christian theology
as will all documentaries related to biblical archaeology I will def watch it
__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!
ShaniFaye is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 03:41 PM   #3 (permalink)
Junkie
 
highthief's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
It's an interesting study - as you say, there's no way to know for sure, one way or the other, but it certainly generates debate and thought about the nature of Christ. That's not a bad thing.
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.
highthief is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 03:59 PM   #4 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Sorcha's Avatar
 
Location: South Carolina
Marked that on my calendar.

I don't know that it will have much implication for the Christian community, despite the seemingly provocative subject. I asked my mom what she would do if the body of Jesus were found, proven unequivocally, awhile ago. She said she'd think it was a fake. I got a similar response at a Christian forum I was a member of when I posted a discussion of this.

To be honest, although I'm not Christian, looking at this article I have to agree that it doesn't really prove anything completely. It could raise some really interesting theological discussion though, like highthief said.
__________________
Ew gross germs! It's all icky and corpsey!
Sorcha is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 04:56 PM   #5 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Old news. James Cameron is not a theologian or biblical archaeologist. He's just looking for publicity.

This was covered way back in 1996 by the BBC. They already did a documentary on this tomb discovery and pretty much refuted it.

As in all things Hollywood, they just can't leave the original alone so they had to make a remake of an old documentary.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 05:23 PM   #6 (permalink)
Mistress of Mayhem
 
Lady Sage's Avatar
 
Location: Canton, Ohio
It will either boost morale for the christians or it will give them something else to bicker over and divide themselves.
__________________
If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open
.
It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper
Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.
Lady Sage is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 05:58 PM   #7 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
I say we clone Jesus and bring back the anti-christ. That would make a great movie.

If they did a DNA test, they should have enought for a clone then.

I could just imagine the media backlash from that suggestion.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 06:02 PM   #8 (permalink)
Mistress of Mayhem
 
Lady Sage's Avatar
 
Location: Canton, Ohio
Ooooo I like it! Perhaps they will use any DNA found to clone whomever or whatever was there and we will get a look-see?
__________________
If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open
.
It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper
Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.
Lady Sage is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 07:55 PM   #9 (permalink)
Addict
 
Thank you jorgelito. Very well spoken or typed as it were.
newtx is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 07:28 AM   #10 (permalink)
Insensative Fuck.
 
Location: Boon towns of Ohio
If it was the BBC special doc, I saw, they didn't refute anything.

They basically ended it by saying "We can't prove it is infact the JEsus Christ in the bible, We can't prove it isn't"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crompsin
Menoman is my hero. He masturbates with Brillo pads. And likes it.
Menoman is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 08:05 AM   #11 (permalink)
big damn hero
 
guthmund's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Sage
Ooooo I like it! Perhaps they will use any DNA found to clone whomever or whatever was there and we will get a look-see?
Well, you'd have to find that guy from Jurassic Park and then...wait...were the Jesus bones encased in amber? They weren't? Well, that might be a problem...
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
guthmund is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 08:44 AM   #12 (permalink)
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
 
Bill O'Rights's Avatar
 
Location: In the dust of the archives
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menoman
They basically ended it by saying "We can't prove it is infact the JEsus Christ in the bible, We can't prove it isn't"
Well, that's just the point. Without having a test sample, from a "known" relative, then DNA analysis is pretty useless...not?

I mean...it could be Jesus. Or...it could just as easily have been some guy named Fred.

All in all, I'll probably watch the documentary. It seems to be up my alley.
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.
Bill O'Rights is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 09:57 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Some things that should be noted is that the names Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Judah are the most common names of that time. In addition, It was Jesus of Nazarus not Jesus of Jerusalem. In addition, the location of this tomb is no where near the believed location of Jesus's tomb. Finally, there were also some reports that the names have been miss translated but I haven't verified this yet.

I was watching a story on MSNBC last night and it reported that archaeologists across the globe are lining up saying that this documentary is not archaeologically sound with some of them saying the odds of this being the real Jesus's tomb is about one in a million. James Cameron is merely trying to make money by dishonestly creating controversy.
Rekna is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 09:58 AM   #14 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
It's called faith, not knowledge. It doesn't matter what you show someone. If they have strong faith they won't believe you.
kutulu is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:03 AM   #15 (permalink)
Junkie
 
sorry double post.

Last edited by Rekna; 02-27-2007 at 10:11 AM..
Rekna is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:36 AM   #16 (permalink)
Addict
 
Val_1's Avatar
 
Location: In a State of Denial
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
Well, that's just the point. Without having a test sample, from a "known" relative, then DNA analysis is pretty useless...not?

I mean...it could be Jesus. Or...it could just as easily have been some guy named Fred.
Exactly. So, we need to get a DNA sample from God, run the tests and see. Is God my baby's daddy? Watch and find out.
__________________

I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day.

-Frank Sinatra
Val_1 is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 12:39 PM   #17 (permalink)
Here
 
World's King's Avatar
 
Location: Denver City Denver
I've been trying to come up with a witty comment about this but...



I got nothing.
__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown
World's King is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 01:29 PM   #18 (permalink)
Misanthropic
 
Crack's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio! yay!
Damn the Romans. They can't do anything right. They should have hired the Mafia to do the hit.

We can find the tomb of Jesus, lost over 2000 years ago, but we still can't find Jimmy Hoffa

(how is that WK?)
__________________
Crack, you and I are long overdue for a vicious bout of mansex.

~Halx
Crack is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 07:53 PM   #19 (permalink)
Pickles
 
ObieX's Avatar
 
Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)
Quote:
In addition, the location of this tomb is no where near the believed location of Jesus's tomb.
I've heard this mentioned a few times on a few reports.. but if you really think about it.. the bones WOULD NOT be found near the tomb. As is mentioned in the bible the body was moved out of the tomb or Jesus resurrected from the tomb and left it.. so why would the bones be in it? The bones are said to have been found "across town" from the tomb. Is it not logical that they could have been moved that short distance?
__________________
We Must Dissent.
ObieX is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:08 PM   #20 (permalink)
Addict
 
Vincentt's Avatar
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
I recall that Jesus, Mary, and Joesph were popular names at the time.

Simply going on the names of the tomb is not enough evidence.
__________________
.
Vincentt is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 03:01 AM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
highthief's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
Well, that's just the point. Without having a test sample, from a "known" relative, then DNA analysis is pretty useless...not?

I mean...it could be Jesus. Or...it could just as easily have been some guy named Fred.

All in all, I'll probably watch the documentary. It seems to be up my alley.
I think the intention of the DNA comparison to compare the DNA of the people found in the tomb to establish a relationship to one another, more than anything else.

As for the BBC special - yes, the issue has been examined before, but obviously this guy has studied it again. To say "Well, something was studied once and X was the result, so we should never study it again" is not a very logical statement. A lot of people studied things, go a negative result, before someone else came along and turned that result on its head.
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.
highthief is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 04:05 AM   #22 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
interesting that there are christian organizations coming out to say that discovery is mounting an attack on christianity.

anything that allows for the mortality of christ is bad. this doc, if true, suggests that christ had a child with mary madgeline and further that he did not physically ascend into heaven.

all things that throw his divinity into doubt.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 06:44 AM   #23 (permalink)
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
 
Bill O'Rights's Avatar
 
Location: In the dust of the archives
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
interesting that there are christian organizations coming out to say that discovery is mounting an attack on christianity.
Interesting? Nah...not so much. Predictable? Oh, most definately.

And I don't say that in a negative sense. IF this is ever proven, beyond an irrefutable doubt...and it is laid out, in plain and simple black and white, that we have been lied to for the past 2000 years...you think people aren't going to be dragged into this kicking and screaming?
For some, their entire lives...their very reason for existence...centers around their firm belief in the divinity of Christ, and his physical ascention into heaven.

I do have to wonder, though...why is it that everything these days seems to be viewed as an "attack on Christianity"? Are their walls weakening to the point that challenges are now becoming more of a threat?
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Last edited by Bill O'Rights; 02-28-2007 at 06:49 AM..
Bill O'Rights is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 06:46 AM   #24 (permalink)
"I'm sorry. What was the question?"
 
Daoust's Avatar
 
Location: Paradise Regained
I think the best position for Christians to take is a wait and see attitude. In the end, these things always end up as hoaxes or dead ends, and the people who make these outrageous claims come off looking like fools. Of course Christianity at large is going to raise a bit of a stink because we don't like it when secular parties try to tell us that the things we believe in are all based on a lie. You can't challenge Muslims or any tennent of the religion of Islam without getting severe backlash from them, so why is it a surprise if Christians get their backs up when people try to refute the claims of their religion?
__________________
I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace
But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys
Daoust is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:30 AM   #25 (permalink)
Addict
 
Val_1's Avatar
 
Location: In a State of Denial
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
interesting that there are christian organizations coming out to say that discovery is mounting an attack on christianity.
That seems to be the latest tactic by christian groups to try to quite anyone that dare have another opinion. Any issue that gets brought up is suddenly an attack of some sort. War on Christmas, War on Faith, the attack on family values, blah, blah, blah ....
__________________

I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day.

-Frank Sinatra
Val_1 is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:06 AM   #26 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
I mean...it could be Jesus. Or...it could just as easily have been some guy named Fred.
Oh, it's a guy named Jesus all right. The question is more if it's The Jesus.

Fred's buried over there...

Quote:
Originally Posted by crack

We can find the tomb of Jesus, lost over 2000 years ago, but we still can't find Jimmy Hoffa
Patience, patience. We've only been looking for Hoffa for 40 years. There's another 1960 years to go before we find him.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:46 AM   #27 (permalink)
still, wondering.
 
Ourcrazymodern?'s Avatar
 
Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge
This tends towards the bizarre even more than I do.
__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT
Ourcrazymodern? is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:09 AM   #28 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
I'm not so sure that Christians are panicking or claiming an attack. The discovery of the tombs really doesn't shake the foundation of faith. There are plenty of reasonable explanations for the existence of the tomb without comprising the core of Christianity.

Further, the point I was trying to make in my previous post is that I think James Cameron is just looking for a publicity stunt, that the subject had been covered before by experts, not Hollywood sensationalists, and that Cameron really hadn't done his research thoroughly. Basically, just trying to present two sides of the story instead of the bandwagoning here.

The presence of a tomb of that size suggests a family wealth. The Jesus in question was not a wealthy man.

The tomb is most likely NOT of a man named Fred as Fred was not a popular Hebrew name of that period.

And BOR, the reason why Christians are getting riled up is because they ARE being attacked. The TFP is a great example. Look at all the atheism threads and the Christian bashing that goes on inside of them. I only recently, and reluctantly "outed" myself as a Christian whereas I was loathe to do so due to all the anti-Christian attitudes that is prevalent on these boards. It isn't 100% blatant but it does exist. And no, I'm not paranoid.

Like in all things, we probably should NOT make sweeping assumptions. There are plenty of Christians who are not afraid or panicked just because a "tomb discovery" was made. Current objection is more to the sensationalization and rush to "see I told you so" type judgements that erupted after the discovery. In other words, a panicked few Christians are responding to the taunts of a (presumably) few atheist, etc.

I agree with the wait and see. In either case, I remain fascinated at the possibilities and undeterred in my own faith.

Last edited by jorgelito; 02-28-2007 at 09:39 AM.. Reason: grammar
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:37 AM   #29 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights
I do have to wonder, though...why is it that everything these days seems to be viewed as an "attack on Christianity"? Are their walls weakening to the point that challenges are now becoming more of a threat?
Because somehow, the ~75% seems to like thinking that they are the minority.
kutulu is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:42 AM   #30 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
this is getting curiouser and curiouser.

with respect to the op: while i doubt that anything like a definitive claim could possible be made about whether this tomb is or is not that of "the" jesus--but i confess that i really quite hope that it IS the tomb of The Man, his wife and child--not least because that would destabilize the relations between the main gospels and some of their gnostic contemporaries. i am pretty sympathetic to gnosticism (well, some kinds of it) and thought that almost every reason augustine outlined to oppose gnosticism--particularly the problems that system posed for social regulation--were in a way virtues. the wrong variant of christianity won with the conversion of constantine.

other point:

jorgelito's post is interesting, i think.

first in the choice of the term "outing" with reference to his christianity--why that term? i find it more than passing strange.

in terms of the "anti-christian" stuff: i dont see it that way--i see a great diversity of positions, some of which are amenable to active questioning of believers themselves (as in why do you believe this...) and many others that are not.

one fairly obvious element that cuts across this (but even here, there is little consistency) is that most have had at least some experience of christianity and have broekn with it--and this for a variety of reasons. it seems to me that this break is not easy, particularly if in breaking with christianity you are breaking with signficant elements of your own frame of reference when you were younger. in these situations--and there are alot of them, if you read the various debates about atheism etc, of late--there is obviously a ton of affect from a variety of sources that gets displaced onto christianity---does this mean that the attitudes expressed are "anti-christian"?

i dont understand what "anti-christian" actually means.
would any expression of non-belief be anti-christian?
where does anti-christian stop and start?

there is a tendency within some christian communities to see in all expressions of beliefs that are not consistent with their own evidence of "anti-christian" attitudes--all of it gets associated with satan, yes?
and from that association, what alternatives are possible?
being-in-the-world is cast as warfare between two parties and everyone is of one party or the other.
this is consistent, cutting across all denominations--what varies is the centrality of this position in a larger worldview--not all denominations make this notion of spiritual warfare the absolute center of their views--but some do--fundamentalist protestants in the us are particularly committed to it, it seems (from my experience as a kid with some of these groups, it IS central)

it seems to me that many christian denominations operate from an assumption of hegemony and either will not or cannot adjust to being in a pluralist context--because within such a context, this notion of spritual warfare pitting the "good" (christians) against "evil" (everyone else) is wholly dysfunctional.

but hey, that's just my opinion, man.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 10:08 AM   #31 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Great post roachboy, I'm glad you asked those questions. I appreciate your honesty and sincerity. Allow me to address your curiosity.

I purposefully chose to use the term "outing" to evoke a feeling. In other words, for me, I felt I had to "hide" my religious identity amidst a hostile environment to my chosen religion. I wanted to offer that perspective to the board at large to share what it's like to be on the other side in the hopes of eliciting empathy.

Secondly, my use of the term "anti-Christian" is specifically aimed at prevailing attitudes towards that peer cohort by the mainstream which I define as non-religious or atheist (I'm using these labels for convenience and arguments sake). Some of these attitudes include attacking Christian belief, snide remarks, and downright hostility. In context of the OP and reference article, there has been a lot of reaction that can be reasonably defined as "anti-Christian".

What you are saying roachboy I actually do agree with but within the given context. In fact, we could open up another thread on that. The problem isn't the disagreement. Disagreement is healthy and stimulating. It's when it turns nasty or personal that all semblance of civil debate or "higher evolved learning - what the tfp is all about, (ironic isn't it) is decayed and discussion ceases and bashing begins.

So roachboy, no, "anti-Christian" does not mean non-belief.

I think some of the reactions we see are due in part because of the high-intensity level of emotions involved and the rush to "defend", or the panic effect when one group feels it is under attack. I would also contend that the Christian community is very diverse and not easily stereotyped. As such, wholesale assumptions and generalizations are not useful. What exacerbates the communication is the inherent laziness in people to reduce things to simple binaries: us vs them, good vs evil, Christians vs everyone else, everyone else vs Christians, Democrats vs Republican - when the reality is, in fact, much more complex, much more subtle, and much more deserving of a qualitative examination instead of the usual perfunctory glance over and typing. I suppose this would be part and parcel to the memes you always speak of. The reduction of complex issues to overly simplified sound bites.

And Roach, this is just my opinion too

note - Minority in a social context does not necessarily denote a literal numerical minority, but rather a power one. So while there could be a numerical Christian majority, it is possible for that group to be underrepresented in the power structure or otherwise feel unempowered in a social context.

Last edited by jorgelito; 02-28-2007 at 10:11 AM..
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 10:26 AM   #32 (permalink)
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
 
Bill O'Rights's Avatar
 
Location: In the dust of the archives
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
And BOR, the reason why Christians are getting riled up is because they ARE being attacked. The TFP is a great example. Look at all the atheism threads and the Christian bashing that goes on inside of them. I only recently, and reluctantly "outed" myself as a Christian whereas I was loathe to do so due to all the anti-Christian attitudes that is prevalent on these boards. It isn't 100% blatant but it does exist. And no, I'm not paranoid.
Paranoid? Maybe...maybe not, I'm not qualified to make that call. I would, however, suggest that you may be somewhat over sensitive. What I see...and correct me if I'm wrong...are atheists, myself included, speaking out after years and years of suppresion. Until somewhat recently, one did not so much as dare to speak out against the Church.
Again...I could be wrong (it's happened once before ), but I dont see Christians being "attacked". I don't see Christians being hauled off and beaten. I don't see churches being burned. Nor do I see public demonstrations condemning Christianity. You are being questioned...not attacked.

As a whole Christians do not...affect me? Phase me. Whatever. I have some very good friends, both on these boards and in real life that are devoutly Christian. That's great. I don't know if they are better people because of it, or in spite of it, but I respect them all the same. You included, Jorgelito. But, don't accuse us atheists of attacking your belief just because we don't believe in it and are becoming more vocal about it.
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.
Bill O'Rights is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 10:39 AM   #33 (permalink)
Submit to me, you know you want to
 
ShaniFaye's Avatar
 
Location: Lilburn, Ga
No we are just being told in another thread that we can be "cured" of our christianity. I have to say I feel the same way as jorgelito sometimes. I have yet to tell an atheist they are stupid or ridiculous or delusional if they think "this is all there is" because I so firmly believe the opposite, but yet its perfectly ok to tell ME that.

As for this "tomb". Im not at all "scared" about it....and I do think the reactions I've seen from other christians are too over the top and borders on showing how much faith they DONT have
__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!
ShaniFaye is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 10:43 AM   #34 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Ah, I think I get what you are saying; that the axe swings both ways. But I suppose that in itself should prove both points. One would think that seeing both sides would bring more understanding.

I cannot attest to the years of suppression that you speak of as I have not lived through them and I think it would be geographically dependent. Religious attitudes vary from place to place which would affect our attitudes.

Obviously I am not referring to any "hauling off and beating" of Christians or "churches being burned" or "public demonstrations condemning Christianity" (although the war on Christmas and the fight to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance come close). On these boards, I have not seen any religious or Christians "attacking" non-religious or atheists but I have seen a lot of digging at Christians here. That is what I am referring to and in a broader context, the popularity of "anti-Christian" sentiment in our popular culture.

As I said before, questioning is good, it is healthy and stimulating. I would even go so far as to argue that instilling doubt every now and and then is a good "tool" or exercise in reaffirming one's faith regardless of religion. For the record Mr. O 'Rights, I am not "accusing atheists of attacking Christian belief just because you're questioning it and becoming more vocal", I am pointing out that there is an anti-Christian pattern going on outside of just questioning a belief.

I would also like to point out that the discussion is hardly singular. There are many facets to the "Great Debate" as it were and sometimes gets lost in an oversimplifies "us vs them" framework.

Last edited by jorgelito; 02-28-2007 at 10:46 AM.. Reason: spelling
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 11:55 AM   #35 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito

Obviously I am not referring to any "hauling off and beating" of Christians or "churches being burned" or "public demonstrations condemning Christianity" (although the war on Christmas and the fight to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance come close).
all i can say is that this is hogwash.

the american state is a secular state. there is no war on christmas and the removal of god from the pledge is just addressing the fact that not all americans are christian.

just because it gets said a lot doesn't make it a true thing.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:11 PM   #36 (permalink)
Submit to me, you know you want to
 
ShaniFaye's Avatar
 
Location: Lilburn, Ga
I guess that depends on your outlook....I know in these parts its very rampant talk radio discussion during the christmas season on how offensive it is to hear "merry christmas" and as for the pledge....that crap makes me sick....its perfectly ok for a non believer to say THEIR rights are being stepped on for having to say "one nation under god" but yet if WE get upset that OUR right to say it is coming under fire we get labled as forcing our religion on people....but thats another discussion for another thread that Im sure exists somewhere already

(and before any one gets on their horse here....I AM a christian that understands that factual evidence has proven Christ was born in April and that the catholic church put it in december to try to take away from the winter solstice that the pagans practiced, but until the world decides christmas is in april instead of december, I will continue to say merry christmas in december)
__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!
ShaniFaye is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:21 PM   #37 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
It is not hogwash. First of all, you are taking it too literally.

There was a "war on Christmas" that took the form of knee-jerk banning of Christmas related items, decorations in some places. Whether banning of carols, Christmas trees, while not a literal war (I thought that was obvious), it was most certainly a social war of sorts. Then came the counter and "self-correction" that took place including reinstating of said formerly banned items. It got so out of hand that people were "offended" if they were wished a Merry Christmas. Wishing someone a Merry Christmas is a far cry from persecuting non-Christians or oppressing them. So yes, I most definitely feel there was a "crusade" of sorts or war if you will, carried out against Christmas.

As a Christian, I liked the Pledge the way it is but at the same time, as an American, I appreciate the secular nature of our country. As such I can agree that a contesting of the constitutionality of "God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is reasonable. By the way, removal of "God" from the Pledge is NOT "addressing the fact that not all Americans are Christian" because Christians are not the only ones who believe in God (Muslims, Jews etc). Sure I realize the original intent of the phrase was a reaction to Cold War sentiments as a way of sticking it to the non-believing Ruskies. But the fight to remove "God" from the Pledge quickly devolved from a Constitutional argument to Christian bashing (in some circles). That is what I am referring to.

I do realize not everyone or every atheist was like that but I thought it fair to point it out within the context of the discussion.

In the same way that "just because it gets said a lot doesn't make it a true thing" then you have to extend the same courtesy regarding Christians when many make blanket statements that "Christians are this or that...".
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:22 PM   #38 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
note - Minority in a social context does not necessarily denote a literal numerical minority, but rather a power one. So while there could be a numerical Christian majority, it is possible for that group to be underrepresented in the power structure or otherwise feel unempowered in a social context.
Give me a break. There is no underrepresentation of Christians in power. After over 200 years the first Muslim ever was voted into congress and there are about 30 Jews in Congress. There are no atheists. I didn't check gays, but I doubt they have an equal representation.

Gays, atheists, Muslims, and Jews get attacked on a daily basis on the radio, in print, and during sermons. Although our laws aren't formally Christian based, in practicality, a hell of a lot of them are.

Yes, the other sides have started pushing back. Its about damn time. Christians have shown they can't handle it and hence we have the 'War on Christmas'

Nobody is trying to take your Bible away from you. We are only shoving it out of our faces.
kutulu is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:34 PM   #39 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Whoa, calm down there buddy.

First of all, I never said Christians were a minority and I was not talking about the dominant power super structure, I was explaining the social definition. In some populations segments (sub divisions of the main), it is understandable why some would feel they were in the minority.

Funny you mention sermons because I have never ever heard one which "attacked gays, atheists, Muslims, and Jews on a daily basis". Let's not paint the whole group with the same brush. By the same token, all I hear is vitriol and hatred spouted at and directed at Christians on a daily basis on campus and in class. But I do not assume that all atheists or other believers to be this way.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Christian's can't handle" the "other sides pushing back". Did you expect that Christians would just sit here and let the attacks fly without any counterpoints?

And I'm not sure who is shoving a bible in your face here. I certainly haven't, nor any of my Christian brethren in my community (but I am sure some do, just not all of us).
jorgelito is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:41 PM   #40 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
on all sides of this issue it is not that all do. it is always that a few do. the few are just more vocal.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
 

Tags
discovered, jesus, tomb


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:03 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360