Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels

Religions > Atheism > Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 15 of 32

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Sound of Trumpet"
Date:	25 Oct 2006 05:25:17 AM
Object:	Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels

http://www.equip.org/free/DJ028.htm
BOOK REVIEWS
Eyewitness to Jesus:
Amazing New Manuscript Evidence about the Origin of the Gospels
by Carsten Peter Thiede and Matthew d'Ancona
When I first read in the Los Angeles Times in early 1995, that an
expert had reevaluated some papyrus fragments of the Gospel of Matthew
and dated them to the first century, I realized this could have
far-reaching ramifications for biblical scholarship. For the past two
centuries, liberal higher critics have used literary arguments and the
lack of manuscripts from the first century to support their assumption
that the Gospels were written long after the events they describe.
If hard artifacts verify the dating of Matthew's Gospel as far back
as A.D. 60, these artifacts would destroy the foundation of liberal
higher criticism. Since some of these same scholars argue that Mark
wrote the first Gospel, this discovery would push the composition of
Mark to within 20 years, at most, of the events his Gospel describes.
Taken together, the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and
Luke's second volume, Acts, would give us a record of the events of
Jesus' life, death, and resurrection indisputably written within the
lifetimes of those who were eyewitnesses and who, therefore, could have
disputed any untrue assertions. There would be no time for fabrications
to develop, no time for a "Jesus of faith" to replace the "Jesus of
history," no time for the church to evolve a supernatural story from a
simple inspiring teacher, and no time for Christians to transform
first-century events into second or third-century pseudohistory.
Although the literary arguments and philosophical presuppositions of
the liberal higher critics have their own fatal flaws, their subjective
nature sometimes makes them difficult to refute clearly. For example, a
common liberal presupposition is that Jesus Himself never claimed to be
God, so any deity statements attributed to Him in the Gospels must be
later composition inserted in His name. A discovery that depends, not
on changing theories of literary interpretation, but on empirical
evidence from paper, ink, and penmanship, would refute the liberal
theories with unmistakable finality.
I found another report of the discovery in a biblical archaeology
magazine and realized that, if it could be verified, it would provide
an even more important historical context for the New Testament than
that provided for the Old Testament by the 1948 discovery of the Dead
Sea Scrolls. This is because it affirms eyewitness authorship.
Carsten Peter Thiede's work first appeared in a professional journal
on which the London press reported. Shortly thereafter, Thiede
collaborated with Matthew d'Ancona, the London Times editor who broke
the story. The result is the very readable, clearly written Eyewitness
to Jesus. Although the book is not overtly a Bible apologetic, it
certainly lends itself to that. Those who want to learn more about this
fascinating subject will also appreciate the book's helpful
footnotes, glossary, and extensive bibliography.
In addition to Thiede's well-argued redating of the Matthew
fragments, chapter six, "Scribes and Christianity," contains
fascinating auxiliary information for understanding the literary and
historical background of the New Testament. In this chapter Thiede
discusses the multilingual society of first-century Israel; Jesus'
childhood exposure to Greek culture in Sepphoris, the capital of
Galilee, less than four miles from Nazareth; Jesus' use of Greek
literary terms; Jesus' and Paul's familiarity with Greek drama;
first-century scribal techniques; first-century "shorthand," especially
customary religious abbreviations called nomen sacrum; and a summary of
traditions regarding Peter's final days before his martyrdom. The
contents of this chapter alone will enrich anyone's understanding and
appreciation of the New Testament.
The Matthew fragments redated by Thiede are at Magdalen College
(Oxford). They are called The Magdalen Papyrus (listed as Greek 17 and
p64). There are three fragments written on both sides, together
representing 24 lines from Matthew 26:7-33. Two of the three fragments
are a little larger than 4 x 1 cm.; the other is smaller, 1.6 x 1.6 cm.
Another two fragments, located in Spain, are called the Barcelona
Papyrus (P. Barc. inv. 1/p67) and contain portions of Matthew 3:9, 15;
5:20-22, 25-28.
The Magdalen Papyrus surfaced in the modern world in 1901, when Charles
B. Huleatt purchased it from an antiquities dealer in Luxor, Egypt.
Nothing is known of the fragment's preservation before that time.
Huleatt donated the fragments to Magdalen College, where they were
given a cursory examination by Magdalen scholar Arthur Hunt, who
tentatively dated them to the fourth century. In 1953, Colin Roberts
redated the Magdalen Papyrus to the later second century and
established their connection to the Barcelona fragments.
More than 40 years later Thiede reexamined the fragments, using
state-of-the-art electronic scanners with close analysis of the
paper, ink, letter formation, line length, and other factors to redate
the fragments to around A.D. 60. Thiede's tests and skill appear to
be well within responsible papyrology, although his conclusions have
met with strong opposition from critics.
I have examined most of the critical articles and have found their
criticisms less convincing than Thiede's conclusions. A layperson's
paraphrase of one common criticism is that the papyrus must not be from
the first century because there weren't any codexes (book-leafs) in
first-century Jewish/Christian literature but only scrolls, even though
the papyrus has all of the physical characteristics of a first-century
document. As Thiede rightly points out, the argument against
first-century codexes is an argument from silence - of the small
percentage of recovered early manuscript portions, no indisputable
first-century codex portion has been identified. If, however, the
Magdalen/Barcelona codex is first century, then we do have an example
of a first-century codex. Moreover, if critical assumptions are
reconsidered, and cutting-edge papyrology tests are applied to other
previously dated fragments, we may well find other early examples of
codexes.
Time and careful scholarship will tell whether Thiede's redating is
sound. If it is (and the more I study the issue, the more confidence I
have in Thiede), we will have valuable affirmation of the eyewitness
nature of the Gospel records, the uninterrupted and unchanging
preservation of those testimonies, and our twentieth-century
inheritance of "the faith that God has once for all entrusted to the
saints" (Jude 3) by those who "did not follow cleverly invented
stories," but "were eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Pet. 1:16).
- Reviewed by Bob Passantino
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	03 Nov 2006 01:27:32 PM

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 17:37:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <cl6kk25vd8vqbi3og8qbibi5cupa526hfv@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

Or it might lead a reasonable and knowledgeable person to conclude that
there was something special about the brother to cause him to be mentioned.

Which is the claim you're using the engraving to prove. Assuming your
conclusion.

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their
numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion,
only His nonexistence could excuse Him."
-A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	05 Nov 2006 03:12:42 PM

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 10:44:09 AM

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he
unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."
-- Bertrand Russell.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 04:35:42 PM

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
- Refer: <bhpuk2lmhaoirc095jnrescmjgol4h1cqs@4ax.com>

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

I'd sue the Prof for outright criminal negligence.
I think Kenny-boy would have a watertight case.
--
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 08:26:10 PM

"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:34evk2l7r2lvg9rd2eb9hq404jq50n4ubc@4ax.com...

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
- Refer: <bhpuk2lmhaoirc095jnrescmjgol4h1cqs@4ax.com>

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving
things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be
dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

I'd sue the Prof for outright criminal negligence.
I think Kenny-boy would have a watertight case.

--

Except that is was Al who made the assertion that all tecton were wealthy
persons. Ken and I challenged it.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	07 Nov 2006 12:58:35 AM

On Mon, 6 Nov 2006 20:26:10 -0600, <joerevskelton@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <z9S3h.9956$lY5.4101@bignews6.bellsouth.net>

"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:34evk2l7r2lvg9rd2eb9hq404jq50n4ubc@4ax.com...

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
- Refer: <bhpuk2lmhaoirc095jnrescmjgol4h1cqs@4ax.com>

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving
things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be
dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

I'd sue the Prof for outright criminal negligence.
I think Kenny-boy would have a watertight case.

--

Except that is was Al who made the assertion that all tecton were wealthy
persons. Ken and I challenged it.

Then if I were you, I'd sue your professor as well.
(If you ever had one outside of your infantile imagination)
--
.

User: "Christopher A. Lee"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 11:19:03 AM

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

In their dumbed-down use of language and logic they see it as an
equivalent-but-opposite assertion.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 04:38:54 PM

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:19:03 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
- Refer: <27ruk29sgk7td4sq1a9haaujrefrepukak@4ax.com>

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

In their dumbed-down use of language and logic they see it as an
equivalent-but-opposite assertion.

Black/White, Either/Or "thinking" is endemic in theist circles, and
other groups identified by whacky beliefs, such as konspiracy kooks,
and recipients of alien anal-probes, especially the 3 Abrahamic Bible
believing groups of nutcases.
--
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	07 Nov 2006 01:33:45 AM

In message <r6evk2128mqn557gotu5183f11mf2c3sfr@4ax.com>
Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:

Black/White, Either/Or "thinking" is endemic in theist circles

Oh dear! And some people claim that Americans don't do irony!
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 01:47:04 PM

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:19:03 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

In their dumbed-down use of language and logic they see it as an
equivalent-but-opposite assertion.

But Kendal isn't viewing this as a Christian, he's viewing it as an
archaeologist. Or as someone who sells supposed archaeological
"finds". IOW, as someone who's down at least two levels of
dishonesty.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	06 Nov 2006 04:40:02 PM

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 14:47:04 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
- Refer: <v64vk2poc2ran7e9ukrs9v14gf1hj8teul@4ax.com>

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:19:03 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:44:09 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:12:42 GMT, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

In message <d06nk2db2354qpsokkd18skja93ds072e3@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

I'm not trying to prove anything; you're the one hung up on proving things.
I am simply saying that we do not have enough information to be dogmatic.

Then we reject assertions.

Good - so stop making them.

My refusal to accept your assertions isn't an assertion. Tell your
logic professor that you're entitled to a full refund.

In their dumbed-down use of language and logic they see it as an
equivalent-but-opposite assertion.

When is he going to make it the trifecta, and run for office?
--
.

User: "JessHC"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	28 Oct 2006 08:55:04 PM

Darrell Stec wrote:

After serious contemplation, on or about Thursday 26 October 2006 12:56
pm JessHC perhaps from

wrote:

Kendall K. Down wrote:

In message <ol90k2pcl4numdqoi8bjqdgg0l120sr358@4ax.com>
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:

Secularists only need one argument - there's no objective
extra-Biblical evidence of Jesus, the disciples, the crucifiction,
the resurrection, but there's plenty of evidence that many of the
Biblical claims are false.

How about the James Ossuary? The latest expert opinion in that
on-going dispute is that the ossuary and its inscription is genuine.

Cite?

He is wrong. One of the forgers already confessed.

Thanks. The last I'd read, there was no question it was fake, and I
lost interest at that point.

So you're saying that the thieves were crucified according to
Judean
law with a strictly Roman punishment? (Jews didn't crucify.)

You need to read Josephus. Jews did crucify.

Cite?

Surprisingly he is correct on this one. Josephus mentions that there
was one, and only one instance of crucifixion by a Jew (sort of):

JOSEPHUS' WRITINGS - BOOK 13, CH. 14
2. Now as Alexander fled to the mountains, six thousand of the Jews
hereupon came together [from Demetrius] to him out of pity at the
change of his fortune; upon which Demetrius was afraid, and retired out
of the country; after which the Jews fought against Alexander, and
being beaten, were slain in great numbers in the several battles which
they had; and when he had shut up the most powerful of them in the city
Bethome, he besieged them therein; and when he had taken the city, and
gotten the men into his power, he brought them to Jerusalem, and did
one of the most barbarous actions in the world to them; for as he was
feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered
about eight hundred of them to be crucified; and while they were
living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut
before their eyes. This was indeed by way of revenge for the injuries
they had done him; which punishment yet was of an inhuman nature,
though we suppose that he had been never so much distressed, as indeed
he had been, by his wars with them, for he had by their means come to
the last degree of hazard, both of his life and of his kingdom, while
they were not satisfied by themselves only to fight against him, but
introduced foreigners also for the same purpose; nay, at length they
reduced him to that degree of necessity, that he was forced to deliver
back to the king of Arabia the land of Moab and Gilead, which he had
subdued, and the places that were in them, that they might not join
with them in the war against him, as they had done ten thousand other
things that tended to affront and reproach him. However, this barbarity
seems to have been without any necessity, on which account he bare the
name of a Thracian among the Jews (40) whereupon the soldiers that had
fought against him, being about eight thousand in number, ran away by
night, and continued fugitives all the time that Alexander lived; who
being now freed from any further disturbance from them, reigned the
rest of his time in the utmost tranquillity.

Elsewhere the 800 crucified men are said to be Pharisees. I said sort
of because while a Jewish King many of them considered him a Thracian
king.

But even Josephus calls this isolated instance very rare.

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 02:33:50 AM

In message <1162086904.220466.159820@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
"JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

It was at least more accurate than "Jews never crucified", wasn't it?
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 12:59:36 AM

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my
contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him, the
spinal cord would fully suffice."
- Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.

User: "JessHC"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 10:00:50 AM

Al Klein wrote:

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?

Christ, you know it ain't easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going, they're gonna crucify me.
He hasn't come back yet, but that's probably because he wasn't really a
xian.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 08:01:32 PM

On 29 Oct 2006 08:00:50 -0800, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1162137649.946208.313160@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Al Klein wrote:

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?

Christ, you know it ain't easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going, they're gonna crucify me.

He hasn't come back yet, but that's probably because he wasn't really a
xian.

Bagpipes "Crossed" with irony, perhaps?
.

User: "Al Klein"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 11:13:24 AM

On 29 Oct 2006 08:00:50 -0800, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?

Christ, you know it ain't easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going, they're gonna crucify me.

He hasn't come back yet, but that's probably because he wasn't really a
xian.

I don't know. According to the story he was Jewish, but James'
ossuary was Aramaic, so maybe they were Hebrew (which most Christians
seem [to me, at least] to think were the same).
Or do make-believe characters have make-believe religions? What
religion was Goldilocks?
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains
premature today."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.

User: "Randy Day"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About TheOrigin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 11:29:03 AM

Al Klein wrote:

On 29 Oct 2006 08:00:50 -0800, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?

Christ, you know it ain't easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going, they're gonna crucify me.

He hasn't come back yet, but that's probably because he wasn't really a
xian.

What a silly question. Urs(ul)ine, of course! ;)
--
R
Atheist Chair,
EAC Disciplinary Committee
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 08:02:27 PM

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 12:13:24 -0500, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
- Refer: <53o9k29nvlgbd9c1ekcv8j58nkjps4v55o@4ax.com>

On 29 Oct 2006 08:00:50 -0800, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

On 28 Oct 2006 18:55:04 -0700, "JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com>
wrote:

This surprises me, thanks. It's interesting that "rare" becomes "Jews
did crucify" with no further elaboration.

Christians get crucified and resurrected, don't they?

Christ, you know it ain't easy. You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going, they're gonna crucify me.

He hasn't come back yet, but that's probably because he wasn't really a
xian.

I can't bear to think about it.
The father, the son, and the wholly mummy.
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	28 Oct 2006 12:41:52 PM

In message <4qg68sFmuvu8U1@individual.net>
Darrell Stec <darrell_stec@webpagesorcery.com> wrote:

He is wrong. One of the forgers already confessed.

Did Oded Golan confess to forging the James Ossuary? The fact that he or a
colleague admitted to forging something else entirely is evidence but not
proof.

Surprisingly he is correct on this one. Josephus mentions that there
was one, and only one instance of crucifixion by a Jew (sort of):

Why surprising?

But even Josephus calls this isolated instance very rare.

Does he?
Ken Down

--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

User: "jay"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 12:15:34 PM

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:41:52 +0100, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

He is wrong. One of the forgers already confessed.

Did Oded Golan confess to forging the James Ossuary?
The fact that he or a colleague admitted to forging
something else entirely is evidence but not proof.

When law enforcement finally became involved, it was
discovered that Oded Golan was running a forgery
factory--raided, it yielded all of the tools of the craft and
many forgeries in process of production. He was a
professional forger, and the Israeli Antiquities Authority
dismantled his work on the James Ossuary.
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 03:14:00 PM

In message <15r9k2djomqupbh1ekckqks9dv6757uk78@4ax.com>
jay <jriddle73@hotmail.com> wrote:

That is the charge and certainly Golan had tools that could be used for
forgery - but I'll bet that if the police raided your house or flat, they
would find it stuffed with tools and weapons that could be used for breaking
and entering, murder, making of indecent images and so on. In other words,
you probably have a hammer (breaking and entering), a knife (in the kitchen)
and a camera.
Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he actually did forge
things is another matter entirely.
Note that I am not saying that Golan is not a forger. He may be and it is
possible that he forged the James Ossuary. The purpose of the trial is to
discover the truth - and as the trial is still running, I am surprised that
you have leaped to the conclusion that he is guilty.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

User: "jay"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	30 Oct 2006 05:22:10 PM

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:14:00 +0100, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

Those are innocuous items, and entirely unrelated to the
case against Golan. Law enforcement didn't find hammers,
knives, and cameras--they found a veritable forgery
factory containing "scores of artifacts of unclear
provenience, forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production, epigraphic handbooks,
engraving tools, and labeled bags of soil from excavation
sites around the country." (ARCHAEOLOGY, Sept./Oct.
2003 issue). "Amir Ganor, head of the IAA's theft unit,
claimed that investigators had also found various other
forgeries in various stages of completion, together with a
'factory' equipped to create them (materials used for
restoration work, according to Golan). Among their haul,
they said, were bags of semi-finished ancient royal seals,
a blank stone with the same dimensions as the Joash tablet
[another of the more-than-half-dozen known forgeries that
came from Golan], a newly engraved ossuary, and moulds
that could be used to reproduce bronze statues" (Daily
Telegraph mag., 14 May, 2005). When police raided
Golan's flat, they discovered that Golan had left the James
Ossuary--this so-called priceless relic--on a toilet seat on
the roof of the building.

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	30 Oct 2006 10:02:20 PM

"jay" <jriddle73@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6a0dk212gohb7vop2ve60svnptj8l9j95h@4ax.com...

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:14:00 +0100, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?

Somehow I missed the part in there where he confessed to forging the James
Ossuary. Could you point it out to me?
.

User: "jay"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	31 Oct 2006 04:49:46 PM

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:02:20 -0600, <joerevskelton@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?

Somehow I missed the part in there where he confessed to
forging the James Ossuary. Could you point it out to me?

Tell you what, clown; you take the fine, upstanding Golan's
word for it, and I'll continue to believe my no-doubt-lying eyes.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	31 Oct 2006 06:52:35 PM

"jay" <jriddle73@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kkkfk2t73hi15bq5nu4euvc4ca4hfbi728@4ax.com...

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:02:20 -0600, <joerevskelton@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?

Somehow I missed the part in there where he confessed to
forging the James Ossuary. Could you point it out to me?

Tell you what, clown; you take the fine, upstanding Golan's
word for it, and I'll continue to believe my no-doubt-lying eyes.

In other words he has not confessed to forging the James Ossuary. Thank you.
.

User: "jay"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	01 Nov 2006 07:12:58 PM

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:52:35 -0600, <joerevskelton@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

When law enforcement finally became involved, it
was discovered that Oded Golan was running a
forgery factory--raided, it yielded all of the tools of
the craft and many forgeries in process of
production. He was a professional forger, and the
Israeli Antiquities Authority dismantled his work on
the James Ossuary.

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?

Somehow I missed the part in there where he confessed to
forging the James Ossuary. Could you point it out to me?

Tell you what, clown; you take the fine, upstanding Golan's
word for it, and I'll continue to believe my no-doubt-lying eyes.

In other words he has not confessed to forging the James
Ossuary.

And Al Capone never confessed to having anyone killed, so
it's pretty obvious he never had anyone killed.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	01 Nov 2006 11:06:37 PM

"jay" <jriddle73@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nchik2lvh1vjh44p8dfn8181mdl7hjqt2o@4ax.com...

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:52:35 -0600, <joerevskelton@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

When law enforcement finally became involved, it
was discovered that Oded Golan was running a
forgery factory--raided, it yielded all of the tools of
the craft and many forgeries in process of
production. He was a professional forger, and the
Israeli Antiquities Authority dismantled his work on
the James Ossuary.

Proving that Golan intended to forge things or that he
actually did forge things is another matter entirely.

What part of "forged ancient seals and other inscriptions
in various stages of production" don't you understand?

Somehow I missed the part in there where he confessed to
forging the James Ossuary. Could you point it out to me?

Tell you what, clown; you take the fine, upstanding Golan's
word for it, and I'll continue to believe my no-doubt-lying eyes.

In other words he has not confessed to forging the James
Ossuary.

And Al Capone never confessed to having anyone killed, so
it's pretty obvious he never had anyone killed.

No one claimed that Al Capone confessed.
Someone claimed that the forger of the James Ossuary confessed.
That is not true.
Challenged to cite evidence of such a confession they posted a long article
with no such citation.
I don't know if it was forged or not.
It has not been proved to be forged.
No one has confessed to forging it.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	29 Oct 2006 08:00:47 PM

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:15:34 -0500, jay <jriddle73@hotmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <15r9k2djomqupbh1ekckqks9dv6757uk78@4ax.com>

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:41:52 +0100, Kendall K. Down
<webmaster@diggingsonline.com> wrote:

He is wrong. One of the forgers already confessed.

Did Oded Golan confess to forging the James Ossuary?
The fact that he or a colleague admitted to forging
something else entirely is evidence but not proof.

Don't give Kenny facts.
They confuse him if they don't fit in with his pre-conceived
fantasies.
.

User: "Kendall K. Down"
Title: Re: Eyewitness To Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About The Origin Of The Gospels	30 Oct 2006 02:39:26 AM

In message <95nak25dpqhpvum8or0lved51uou77iaik@4ax.com>
Michael Gray <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote:

Don't give Kenny facts.
They confuse him if they don't fit in with his pre-conceived
fantasies.

I'm all for facts - my trouble is that I collect *all* the facts. It makes
it difficult to be dogmatic, but I just have to live with that.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.

Page 15 of 32