Is James Cameron the anti-christ?

[007]

As per Glen Beck.

http://time-blog.com/middle_east/200...the_crypt.html

February 23, 2007 6:55
Jesus: Tales from the Crypt
Posted by Tim McGirk | Comments (2884) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This

Brace yourself. James Cameron, the man who brought you 'The Titanic' is back with another blockbuster. This time, the ship he's sinking is Christianity.

In a new documentary, Producer Cameron and his director, Simcha Jacobovici, make the starting claim that Jesus wasn't resurrected --the cornerstone of Christian faith-- and that his burial cave was discovered near Jerusalem. And, get this, Jesus sired a son with Mary Magdelene.

No, it's not a re-make of "The Da Vinci Codes'. It's supposed to be true.

Let's go back 27 years, when Israeli construction workers were gouging out the foundations for a new building in the industrial park in the Talpiyot, a Jerusalem suburb. of Jerusalem. The earth gave way, revealing a 2,000 year old cave with 10 stone caskets. Archologists were summoned, and the stone caskets carted away for examination. It took 20 years for experts to decipher the names on the ten tombs. They were: Jesua, son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Mathew, Jofa and Judah, son of Jesua.
Israel's prominent archeologist Professor Amos Kloner didn't associate the crypt with the New Testament Jesus. His father, after all, was a humble carpenter who couldn't afford a luxury crypt for his family. And all were common Jewish names.

There was also this little inconvenience that a few miles away, in the old city of Jerusalem, Christians for centuries had been worshipping the empty tomb of Christ at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Christ's resurrection, after all, is the main foundation of the faith, proof that a boy born to a carpenter's wife in a manger is the Son of God.

But film-makers Cameron and Jacobovici claim to have amassed evidence through DNA tests, archeological evidence and Biblical studies, that the 10 coffins belong to Jesus and his family.

Ever the showman, (Why does this remind me of the impresario in another movie,"King Kong", whose hubris blinds him to the dangers of an angry and very large ape?) Cameron is holding a New York press conference on Monday at which he will reveal three coffins, supposedly those of Jesus of Nazareth, his mother Mary and Mary Magdalene. News about the film, which will be shown soon on Discovery Channel, Britain's Channel 4, Canada's Vision, and Israel's Channel 8, has been a hot blog topic in the Middle East (check out a personal favorite: Israelity Bites) Here in the Holy Land, Biblical Archeology is a dangerous profession. This 90-minute documentary is bound to outrage Christians and stir up a titanic debate between believers and skeptics. Stay tuned.
--Tim McGirk/Jerusalem

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

Are you saying that religion has never and currently does not affect the socio-econmic affairs of the world (not even talking about the stupid ass wars and conflicts throughout the history of the world based on religious beliefs)? I'm not talking about Christianity here, I'm talking about RELIGION.

Yup - Just like government, including the socialistic regimes you dream about.

However, on the other hand, religion has also fostered more charity, arts, exploration, and businesses than any other socio-economic group I can think of.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

100% of people are hypocrites - including you. The fact that you feel compelled to deride others while you state "it's just what I believe" proves just that. With a statement like that you had no intent on attempting to sway anyone's opinion, merely to humiliate them if they disagreed with you - kind of like the religions you are complaining about.

I was using it to show how ridiculously stupid it is as it's impossible to argue against it. You know, I was trying to let the religious people taste their own medicine.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Cochise

What would a family tomb of his be in Jerusalem for? You family was buried where you came from in that culture, so if he did have a family tomb that contained his father's remains, it would have been in Galilee.

Yup

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by H5N1

long story short, religion is as old as mankind... religion was formed to explain the unexplainable

mankind erred when he begain basing his life on the make-believe, aka religion

when one bases one's life on the unproveable, aka religion, one tends to narrow one's mind to not accept anything other than what one believes

so when something comes along to even possibly disprove what one believes, one is so blind with faith that one misses the boat, and in the process doesn't live up to one's human potential, wasting away as a mindless drone

there, that good enough?

Your assumption is in error (IMO) due to the second statement. You have no proof, but merely your own tenet to base the statement that mankind invented religion.

Regardless of what anyone wants to believe, the simple fact is that there is some power somewhere that simply breaks all the base rules of all sciences. You don't believe in a god, fine. Then you assume that either time is not accurately measured (as there has to be a beginning somewhere according to mainstream science), that physics are based upon flawed logic (as matter can be created not simply changed - else where did matter come from), and/or that the law of probability is simply wrong to the infinite power (not only did this cell create life from non-life, but it managed to replicate hundreds of quintillion times in just the right and precarious balance to have trillions of life forms attempting to destroy one another while co-existing without simple destruction). After all, according to science all matter tends toward a resting state. I find all of the above "beliefs" to be just as silly as your idea that mankind created religion to explain the unexplainable.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

I was using it to show how ridiculously stupid it is as it's impossible to argue against it. You know, I was trying to let the religious people taste their own medicine.

You were attempting to ridicule others while calling them hypocrites for ridiculing others.

You can use the old excuse "they started it first", but you were being a hypocrite.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

Yup - Just like government, including the socialistic regimes you dream about.

What? lol

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

However, on the other hand, religion has also fostered more charity, arts, exploration, and businesses than any other socio-economic group I can think of.

I wouldn't agree with any of that statement, even though I know why you think that. Let's see exploration - missionaries would be sent in to clean up only after the places were already discovered (as far as Christianity is concerned). I'm sure some expeditions were commissioned by the church in it's power hay day, but certainly it wasn't the majority if you take the whole history of the mankind.

Charity? Maybe recently and it's always on very small scale, but again, if you look at the whole picture, religion has brought more suffering than anything else.

Arts? I can see that.

Business? You have to be more specific.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

You were attempting to ridicule others while calling them hypocrites for ridiculing others.

You can use the old excuse "they started it first", but you were being a hypocrite.

Jesus, you're reeruned. I was using it on purpose to show that it wasn't a good way to argue. Because if I say "It's just my belief" about something, there's no way you can refute that. Later in the thread you can see me saying that I didn't mean what I said because I don't know the guy.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

What? lol



I wouldn't agree with any of that statement, even though I know why you think that. Let's see exploration - missionaries would be sent in to clean up only after the places were already discovered (as far as Christianity is concerned). I'm sure some expeditions were commissioned by the church in it's power hay day, but certainly it wasn't the majority if you take the whole history of the mankind.

Charity? Maybe recently and it's always on very small scale, but again, if you look at the whole picture, religion has brought more suffering than anything else.

Arts? I can see that.

Business? You have to be more specific.

Trade routes to the Middle East were established by the Christians. The Jesuits opened China to a free market. South America and the Western United States were settled by the Franciscan Monks long before any other settlements were made. The majority of Occidental explorations occurred due to monarchies - but the only reason the pushes into the unknown survived was due to the base of the missionaries.

Charity on a small scale? Prior the generosity of governments of the middle 20th century, where did a family go when they lost income due to the death of the primary male? Who took care of the sick during ravenous plagues? Who took in orphans? To this day the Catholic missionaries do a helluva lot more in the Sudan, Mexico, and the Phillipines than any government effort of which I am aware.

In fact, I am donating my time this summer to help the people of Neuvo Progresso. We are building 6 houses and completing a purified water station for the rest of the village. I don't do this because I am worried about being judged. I don't do it because I fell I need to balance my good deeds versus bad deeds book. I am doing it because I enjoy the time, and because it will assist me in my bid to go to the Sudan for a year in 2009 to do the same in the Dinkan village of Lounariik if the US government allows us to go.

Our church has raised over 300,000.00 nationwide to bring water purifiers and housing materials to the village.

Yours, and others on this board, natural bent to hate any organized religion simply shows your own prejudices to be as narrow as those you deride.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

I don't do this because I am worried about being judged. I don't do it because I fell I need to balance my good deeds versus bad deeds book. I am doing it because I enjoy the time, and because it will assist me in my bid to go to the Sudan for a year in 2009 to do the same in the Dinkan village of Lounariik if the US government allows us to go.

So religion has nothing to do with that charity. You're a nice person. Or are you saying that had you not been religious, you wouldn't do the same?

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

Trade routes to the Middle East were established by the Christians. The Jesuits opened China to a free market. South America and the Western United States were settled by the Franciscan Monks long before any other settlements were made. The majority of Occidental explorations occurred due to monarchies - but the only reason the pushes into the unknown survived was due to the base of the missionaries.

So yeah, exploration wasn't carried out by the church. The church did the early settling in order to spread the word of god.

Originally Posted by KCWolfman

Charity on a small scale? Prior the generosity of governments of the middle 20th century, where did a family go when they lost income due to the death of the primary male? Who took care of the sick during ravenous plagues? Who took in orphans? To this day the Catholic missionaries do a helluva lot more in the Sudan, Mexico, and the Phillipines than any government effort of which I am aware.

You mean like losing the primary male due to a Crusade, Jihad or any religious war/conflict (you know like the one in England, Yugoslavia, India and everywhere else in the world) or some sort of an inquisition? Or being ****ed in the ass by the greedy church in form of land taxes and the indulgences? I'm not saying relgion does no good, I'm saying the negatives outweigh the positives if you take into account that organized religion is full of hypocrites (who feel justified to do anything they ****ing want in the name of god), extremists, was/is/will be full of corruption.

Look, I'm not saying that religion makes you evil, I'm saying that it doesn't stop you from being one and often serves as a very good cover for very bad people. And to add to that, you absolutely don't have to be religious to be a just, moral and overall a good person. And if you're not religious and somehow manage to **** up (bang someone before you marry, lie to parrents, steal something), at least you don't look like a total ****ing hypocrite.

[KCWolfman]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

Look, I'm not saying that religion makes you evil, I'm saying that it doesn't stop you from being one and often serves as a very good cover for very bad people. And to add to that, you absolutely don't have to be religious to be a just, moral and overall a good person. And if you're not religious and somehow manage to **** up (bang someone before you marry, lie to parrents, steal something), at least you don't look like a total ****ing hypocrite.

I deleted the rest of the quote because it is not dead on target with what I started.

You put it all in black and white with your last paragraph. You, and many others who feel an obsessive/compulsive desire to deride organized religion have an overwhelming desire to prove that those who are involved in religion are "hypocrites". The fact is that ALL humans are hypocrites - including you. The old bumper sticker states "I am not perfect, I am forgiven".

Government serves as cover for bad people, school does, hell - jobs do as well.

My point is that every organized group ever created can house evil or bad intent - after all, they are created and run by humans - who have a huge propensity toward evil. But the fact is that more people get good out of religion than bad. If they didn't, the faith based groups would no longer exist.

[007]

Originally Posted by kc rush

To the question “Is James Cameron the anti-christ?”, I was going to say that I sat through Titanic and the answer is a definitive yes. Now after reading through this thread, I’m going to get the popcorn.

Hows that Jiffy Pop tasting?

[mcan]

I've become an atheist as of late, but I seriously doubt James Cameron has been able to disprove Jesus' divinity.


What weirds me out is that there is a part of me that really HOPES he did though. I'd like to see the fallout. I'd love to see if all the Christians in the world would suddenly become Isreali, or if they would adjust the Christian religion to compensate for the "bad news."

In my perfect world, we would stop basing our actions on what we think the Supernatural world wants us to do. I don't believe in the supernatural, and frankly it would be a breath of fresh air to see the world start making a rational and concerted effort to improve upon our NATURAL world.

[kc rush]

Originally Posted by Guru

Hows that Jiffy Pop tasting?

Better all the time.

[Nightwish]

Originally Posted by oaklandhater

Does it piss you off so much that ppl believe in god.

Debunking Jesus, if it happens, is not debunking God. One can very easily believe in God without believing in Jesus. Millions already do.

[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?