Is James Cameron the anti-christ?

[greg63]

Originally Posted by Archie F. Swin

Whats your view?

Originally Posted by Guru

It's Lent. Time to attack Christians. If this were about any other religion the media would be talking about how unfair this is.

I believe he has stated it well.

[007]

Originally Posted by Archie F. Swin

Whats your view?

I have faith in what the bible says. That Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected.

Why is that so wrong to believe in?

[greg63]

Originally Posted by Guru

I have faith in what the bible says. That Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected.

Why is that so wrong to believe in?

Ditto!


It's wrong because of the reasons KC stated.

[greg63]

Originally Posted by Guru

How am I ridiculing anybody. I posted an article. I have no problem with anyones views on the subject. Just respect my view too.

Respect??? You forget where your at.


But, I agree.

[greg63]

I saw that on TV at work, and then ignored it.

[KCWolfman]

Oh, well it is definitely substantiated if they have DNA proof....

After all, Jesus left scads of his DNA in several wooden test tubes in his secret laboratory.

Some people want to disprove the faith based core of Christianity so badly that they are willing to buy any ridiculous notion.

Tell me, whose DNA was tested and against what template?

[greg63]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

Oh, well it is definitely substantiated if they have DNA proof....

After all, Jesus left scads of his DNA in several wooden test tubes in his secret laboratory.

Some people want to disprove the faith based core of Christianity so badly that they are willing to buy any ridiculous notion.

Tell me, whose DNA was tested and against what template?

Excellent question.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by greg63

Excellent question.

They will have some schmuck claim to be an offshoot decendant of Jesus and his DNA will be about 70% similar to the body found - I am betting that will be their "proof".

Also note that "coffins" weren't used for the poor in the Middle East during the time of Christ. Ossuaries were used for the affluent Jews. Their bones were allowed to decompose and their remains were put in small stone boxes, only about 1 foot by 2 foot. The ossuary was then put in a tomb. Christ's family could have never afforded such a luxury. The only one who MAY have been entombed in an ossuary years after his death was Jesus' brother James, who died several years after Christ. - if it was James, then it was afforded only by the charity of the stonecarver or the person who owned the tomb.

An ossuary was found several years ago inscribed "James, brother of Jesus and son of Joseph". The ossuary was the only one of the Joseph and Mary family ever substantiated. It was done in 2002. However, there is a great deal of controversy around that discovery today. The man who owns the ossuary today is Oded Golan, a disreputable collector who has a history of archealogical forgeries surrounding his past.

The interesting paradox with the story is, if you truly want to believe that the ossuary belongs to a family member of Jesus, you have to admit that Jesus is a definitive past living member of the human race.

Cameron has done nothing but attached his name as a producer to a couple of bad documentaries and the horrid failure Solaris over the last decade - he is merely doing what he can to make a buck.

[greg63]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

They will have some schmuck claim to be an offshoot decendant of Jesus and his DNA will be about 70% similar to the body found - I am betting that will be their "proof".

Also note that "coffins" weren't used for the poor in the Middle East during the time of Christ. Ossuaries were used for the affluent Jews. Their bones were allowed to decompose and their remains were put in small stone boxes, only about 1 foot by 2 foot. The ossuary was then put in a tomb. Christ's family could have never afforded such a luxury. The only one who MAY have been entombed in an ossuary years after his death was Jesus' brother James, who died several years after Christ. - if it was James, then it was afforded only by the charity of the stonecarver or the person who owned the tomb.

An ossuary was found several years ago inscribed "James, brother of Jesus and son of Joseph". The ossuary was the only one of the Joseph and Mary family ever substantiated. It was done in 2002. However, there is a great deal of controversy around that discovery today. The man who owns the ossuary today is Oded Golan, a disreputable collector who has a history of archealogical forgeries surrounding his past.

The interesting paradox with the story is, if you truly want to believe that the ossuary belongs to a family member of Jesus, you have to admit that Jesus is a definitive past living member of the human race.

Cameron has done nothing but attached his name as a producer to a couple of bad documentaries and the horrid failure Solaris over the last decade - he is merely doing what he can to make a buck.

Yeah, I heard on the news that one of the main aspects he is basing these wild assumptions on is the fact that the tomb had the names Jesus, Mary and Joseph in it; nothing common about those names in that part of the world in that time.

[Nightwish]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

Oh, well it is definitely substantiated if they have DNA proof....

After all, Jesus left scads of his DNA in several wooden test tubes in his secret laboratory.

Some people want to disprove the faith based core of Christianity so badly that they are willing to buy any ridiculous notion.

Tell me, whose DNA was tested and against what template?

DNA samples from the Shroud of Turin have been stored for quite some time now, waiting for something to test them against. Of course, even this presents a conundrum for Christians - if the samples from the remains match the samples from the Shroud, then one is forced to accept one of two very uncomfortable things: (1) the Shroud was Christ's, and his bones are in the ossuary, meaning he didn't resurrect; or (2) they've been wrong all along about the Shroud belonging to Christ, and the resurrection story is preserved, but the Shroud is lost as an important "proof" of the resurrection and existence of Jesus. Then there will be that subset who will resort to the old, "The Devil put those bones there" argument.

On the other hand, if the Shroud and the bones don't match, everybody can just return to their normal programming.

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Nightwish

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

It won't do jack shit. Bible > Science/Logic.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by Nightwish

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

Personally (and this is just personally as I have a differing view on my Christianity than MANY do) it wouldn't affect it much. I base my beliefs on Jesus' teaching and his actions. The deity aspect is a part of the story, but not the whole of the story, in my heart. Even if it does turn out to be true, that doesn't make him any less the son of God, any less the revolutionary he was/is, and any less the basis of my beliefs.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Nightwish

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

There's no way it can be proven conclusively. The hardcore christians will always have some escape clause.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Nightwish

DNA samples from the Shroud of Turin have been stored for quite some time now, waiting for something to test them against. Of course, even this presents a conundrum for Christians - if the samples from the remains match the samples from the Shroud, then one is forced to accept one of two very uncomfortable things: (1) the Shroud was Christ's, and his bones are in the ossuary, meaning he didn't resurrect; or (2) they've been wrong all along about the Shroud belonging to Christ, and the resurrection story is preserved, but the Shroud is lost as an important "proof" of the resurrection and existence of Jesus. Then there will be that subset who will resort to the old, "The Devil put those bones there" argument.

On the other hand, if the Shroud and the bones don't match, everybody can just return to their normal programming.

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

IN 1973 the shroud was proven to have vermillion ink, not blood in it by Walter McCrone - thus no DNA is available.

I believe the shroud was completely debunked in 1988, according to carbon dating anyway. All three independent labs that investigated the shroud dated it around the 1300s.

Which would create yet another scientific paradox. If you believe the DNA matches and is proof of Christ, then you must accept that cardon dating is seriously flawed and should not be taken as serious scientific fact as it is currently used.

If Cameron's theories are based upon the shroud, he has already laid a foundation of sand for his castle of "proof".

Next

[007]

Originally Posted by Nightwish

DNA samples from the Shroud of Turin have been stored for quite some time now, waiting for something to test them against. Of course, even this presents a conundrum for Christians - if the samples from the remains match the samples from the Shroud, then one is forced to accept one of two very uncomfortable things: (1) the Shroud was Christ's, and his bones are in the ossuary, meaning he didn't resurrect; or (2) they've been wrong all along about the Shroud belonging to Christ, and the resurrection story is preserved, but the Shroud is lost as an important "proof" of the resurrection and existence of Jesus. Then there will be that subset who will resort to the old, "The Devil put those bones there" argument.

On the other hand, if the Shroud and the bones don't match, everybody can just return to their normal programming.

Question, though, especially for the Christians on here - if it is proven conclusively that the remains in that ossuary are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, how will it affect your spirituality and beliefs?

It won't affect my faith in the least.