Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?

[First Baseman]

No, of course not. I never said any such thing, nor did I intend to imply it.

I think the Gospels are very valuable. But it is important to try to understand what we are reading when we read them. And the fact that there is so much copying going on here does not make the Gospels worthless, but it is a significant fact that we need to take into account.

What I find it really interesting that less than 12 hours ago (at the time of this post) you had never realized the fact that much of the Gospels (Matthew and Luke) were copied from Mark. But now you know this. That is wonderful and I hope you are happy that you learned something.

No, I didn't say that I accept any copying as fact. I didn't know that the "general consensus" thought that. I will have to research the parts that might have been copied to see if they were or not for myself.

Unlike many on here I do not accept arguments from authority as factual. Just because some scientist or historian says he thinks something is true that doesn't mean it is. That is especially true about God's word. People who want to dismiss God as mythology go to extreme lengths in their attempts to do so. I have definitely learned that much.

 

[First Baseman]

First off, there are copies that are also translations. Every translation changes the words, God's supposed words. And then there are the (this is really good) "revisions", although they get around that by calling them new translations, like that's supposed to be better. Why do we need all the translations we have. There must be hundreds in English alone--of God's Word. And why do we need commentaries to tell us what God really meant? And was it God Who decided which was to be the canon? Did God initial the authorized and correct copies?

And certainly we shouldn't discard them. There's much to be learned, often information that wasn't intended. We should take ALL revealed texts and apocrypha from every religion and study them intently to see if we can find the first scrap of evidence from anywhere, for revelation or miracles, that isn't hearsay.

I do not believe the meaning of God's word has been changed at all. God is all powerful and He will not allow His word to be permanently changed by human error. You err in that you do not understand the power of Almighty God.

So what if there are many translations? They all say pretty much the exact same thing.

Men filled with the Holy Spirit decided which books are canon and which are not. Again, you err in that you do not understand the power of Almighty God. Currently there are only 7 books which the Catholic Church accepts and the Protestant churches do not. None of those books are significant books concerning doctrine. So that debate is really moot.

You see, the last sentence you bolded is what the Christian most certainly should never do. We only need the word of God. Christ quoted from it and from no other source. He frequently quoted Genesis, a book the atheists most quickly throw out. Jesus certainly believed Genesis, as should every Christian who claims to be a follower of Jesus.

God's word is truth. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. Without Jesus Christ there is no truth, no way and no life.

 

[paarsurrey]

Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?

1. Jesus the ManBarbara Thieringsuggested that Jesus andJudas Iscariothad been crucified together but Jesus survived, marriedMary Magdalene, traveled around theMediterranean areaand then died in Rome.[10][56]

2. In 1995 Kenneth Hosking also suggested that Jesus survived crucifixion, but stated that Jesus was theTeacher of Righteousnessmentioned in theDead Sea Scrollsand decades later (73-74 AD) died as the leader of the Jewish forces which unsuccessfully fought the Romans during theSiege of Masada.[10][57]

3. According to theBook of Mormon, Jesus visited theAmerican nativesafter his resurrection

4. In 1996 the documentaryMysteries of the Bible presented an overview of the theories related to the travels of Jesus to India and interviewed a number of scholars on the subject.

5. Following places are mentioned wheretomb/grave of Jesus is said to be locatedor where it is believed thatJesuswasentombed.

a. Places that have been proposed as the location of such a tomb include:

1. 1. Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem
   2. Garden Tomb, discovered in the 19th century outside the old city of Jerusalem
   3. Talpiot Tomb, rock-cut tomb in the East Talpiot neighborhood, five kilometers south of the Old City in East Jerusalem
   4. Roza Balthe reputed tomb of Jesus in Kashmir
   5. Shingō, Japan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Jesus

6. WAS THE BODY OF CHRIST LAID TO REST IN SOUTHERN FRANCE?



Image on a Reliquary kept in la Sainte-Baume (South of France). The boat carrying Mary Magdelene into Southern France is also carrying a mummified body facing Mary mother of Jesus

It is a point of investigation, carbon dating, DNA matching for all the claimants to find out the remains of Jesus.

Regards

 

[fantome profane]

No, I didn't say that I accept any copying as fact. I didn't know that the "general consensus" thought that. I will have to research the parts that might have been copied to see if they were or not for myself.

In that case you have some wonderful education in your future. Congratulations. I hope you enjoy it.

 

[columbus]

Unlike many on here I do not accept arguments from authority as factual.

How does this square with:
"Men filled with the Holy Spirit decided which books are canon and which are not."?

It seems quite obvious to me that your worldview is based entirely on human authority. From OT authors to Gospel authors to St Paul to the Council of Nicea to the modern RCC authorities, the list is pretty long.
And you assume that you are an authority on who speaks for God and who doesn't.

Do you see how that looks to those of us who don't share your confidence in your abilities on that score?

Tom

 

[Gary Sheldrake]

Things can be proposed by inference or indirectly, imo. But that aside, I am familiar with some of the arguments presented in that manner, a proposed contradiction of historical versus Scriptural. I have never run across something that held any more merit than speculation. I find that many of the conclusions drawn that support a contradictory /narrative, are themselves drawn from what I consider to be false beliefs, bad research, poor logic. But, we can agree to disagree, I'm not here to convince anyone.

Good Evening Q Konn: I think you are being vague. I have presented some very direct and specific points and you have responded in generalities about speculation and conclusions. Please address the specific points I have offered with counterpoints if you would please. I have listed quite a few. Let's pick one. The Romans kept a record of every single census they did. Why should I believe the gospel that says Joseph and Mary were in town for a census when history doesn't support that there was a census. Also, a Jewish man from that time and place would not have taken his wife on the roads with him, firstly because it was considered improper for her to go with him to attend to business, secondly because the roads were very dangerous and thirdly, Mary was about to give birth and she would have been required to stay at home and be attended by female relatives. No male would have set himself up to participate in child birth. It wasn't done. Men didn't know how to deliver a child and socially it was taboo.

So tell me why I should believe these accounts that are clearly at odds with what we know about history and the culture in which Jesus lived? Specifically why do the gospel accounts supersede known facts? Why should I believe that? Listen, I would love to live forever, and I really would like to believe that I'm going to be saved or something, but you have to tell me why I should believe any of this.

All the best,
Gary

 

[fantome profane]

Good Evening Q Konn: I think you are being vague. I have presented some very direct and specific points and you have responded in generalities about speculation and conclusions. Please address the specific points I have offered with counterpoints if you would please. I have listed quite a few. Let's pick one. The Romans kept a record of every single census they did. Why should I believe the gospel that says Joseph and Mary were in town for a census when history doesn't support that there was a census. Also, a Jewish man from that time and place would not have taken his wife on the roads with him, firstly because it was considered improper for her to go with him to attend to business, secondly because the roads were very dangerous and thirdly, Mary was about to give birth and she would have been required to stay at home and be attended by female relatives. No male would have set himself up to participate in child birth. It wasn't done. Men didn't know how to deliver a child and socially it was taboo.

So tell me why I should believe these accounts that are clearly at odds with what we know about history and the culture in which Jesus lived? Specifically why do the gospel accounts supersede known facts? Why should I believe that? Listen, I would love to live forever, and I really would like to believe that I'm going to be saved or something, but you have to tell me why I should believe any of this.

All the best,
Gary

One other point that makes this story of this census highly improbable is the way in which they describe the census being carried out. We are told that it was required that people return to their home towns in order to be counted in the census. But we have no record of the Roman empire ever making such a requirement. In fact we have no record of any empire, civilization, nation etc ever conducting a census in this manner. And of course not, it makes no sense. Why would you want someone to leave their home, leave their business and travel to another town just to be counted? Why have a craftsman stop his work and leave his workshop behind? Why have a farmhand stop working and leave the farm? Why have a merchant shut down their shop? Why require these people to leave the places where they are living for a census? The whole point of a census is to learn who is living where. It makes no sense to make people move from where they are living just to ask them where they live.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

I do not believe the meaning of God's word has been changed at all.

I quoted you in this post about the "word of God". So far, nobody wants to touch it, at least not seriously anyway. Can't say as I blame them:

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/biblical-warnings-irrational.180247/

 

[Desert Snake]

Good Evening Q Konn: I think you are being vague. I have presented some very direct and specific points and you have responded in generalities about speculation and conclusions. Please address the specific points I have offered with counterpoints if you would please. I have listed quite a few. Let's pick one. The Romans kept a record of every single census they did. Why should I believe the gospel that says Joseph and Mary were in town for a census when history doesn't support that there was a census. Also, a Jewish man from that time and place would not have taken his wife on the roads with him, firstly because it was considered improper for her to go with him to attend to business, secondly because the roads were very dangerous and thirdly, Mary was about to give birth and she would have been required to stay at home and be attended by female relatives. No male would have set himself up to participate in child birth. It wasn't done. Men didn't know how to deliver a child and socially it was taboo.

So tell me why I should believe these accounts that are clearly at odds with what we know about history and the culture in which Jesus lived? Specifically why do the gospel accounts supersede known facts? Why should I believe that? Listen, I would love to live forever, and I really would like to believe that I'm going to be saved or something, but you have to tell me why I should believe any of this.

All the best,
Gary

I'm being vague because I couldn't care less about trying to prove speculations incorrect. They look like speculations, that's it, nothing much to argue, imo. I'm also not trying to convince you of anything; I'm not concerned about your beliefs.

 

[Gary Sheldrake]

One other point that makes this story of this census highly improbable is the way in which they describe the census being carried out. We are told that it was required that people return to their home towns in order to be counted in the census. But we have no record of the Roman empire ever making such a requirement. In fact we have no record of any empire, civilization, nation etc ever conducting a census in this manner. And of course not, it makes no sense. Why would you want someone to leave their home, leave their business and travel to another town just to be counted? Why have a craftsman stop his work and leave his workshop behind? Why have a farmhand stop working and leave the farm? Why have a merchant shut down their shop? Why require these people to leave the places where they are living for a census? The whole point of a census is to learn who is living where. It makes no sense to make people move from where they are living just to ask them where they live.

You're right - the Romans didn't trust people to come to far away places to take their word for what they had. They came to you and checked out what you had for themselves.

All the best,
Gary

 

[Gary Sheldrake]

I'm being vague because I couldn't care less about trying to prove speculations incorrect. They look like speculations, that's it, nothing much to argue, imo. I'm also not trying to convince you of anything; I'm not concerned about your beliefs.

Good Morning Q Konn: I don't think we're talking about speculation. We are trying to rectify gospel accounts with known history and common knowledge about the culture in which Jesus lived. The account of a 1st century Jewish man taking his pregnant wife who is about to deliver on the roads for a census that we know didn't happen is like asserting that Joseph and Mary were in Bethlehem for the annual pork festival and then calling it speculation when someone questions the veracity of that account.

All the best,
Gary

 

[First Baseman]

How does this square with:
"Men filled with the Holy Spirit decided which books are canon and which are not."?

It seems quite obvious to me that your worldview is based entirely on human authority. From OT authors to Gospel authors to St Paul to the Council of Nicea to the modern RCC authorities, the list is pretty long.
And you assume that you are an authority on who speaks for God and who doesn't.

Do you see how that looks to those of us who don't share your confidence in your abilities on that score?

Tom

No, sir. My worldview is based on God's authority, not men's. Men only have the authority that God chooses to give them.

 

[First Baseman]

I quoted you in this post about the "word of God". So far, nobody wants to touch it, at least not seriously anyway. Can't say as I blame them:

That's weird because I hold God's word to be very rational. His ways are just and holy whereas men just seem to wish to cater to majority opinion.

Note that there are no "races" in the Bible. Note also that there are no "minorities."

 

[First Baseman]

You're right - the Romans didn't trust people to come to far away places to take their word for what they had. They came to you and checked out what you had for themselves.

All the best,
Gary

Generalizations concerning Roman practices by people who were not there at the time do not convince me that the Bible is incorrect. The Biblical authors were there at the time and know far more about what happened there than people who speculate about it today do.

Also, qkonn is quite correct. Speculation requires no honest rebuttal. It just needs to be pointed out as speculation, which he has well done.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

That's weird because I hold God's word to be very rational. His ways are just and holy whereas men just seem to wish to cater to majority opinion.

Note that there are no "races" in the Bible. Note also that there are no "minorities."

Still can't face the music eh? In any case, still not response.

 

[paarsurrey]

Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?
Further to post #183 in the thread.

There are people who claim to be physical descendants of Jesus, their claim should be paid due attention to by the researchers, like Olsson of France, the 59th descendant of Jesus and seeking DNA testing of the shrine's remains. It is a challenge to the lovers of Jesus.

https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Roza+Bal+Jesus
"That Jesus survived crucifixion, travelled to Kashmir, eventually died there and is buried in Srinagar is an urban legend which has found many takers over the years. Every season hundreds of tourists visit the Rozabal shrine of Sufi saint Yuz Asaf in downtown Srinagar, believed by many to be the final resting place of Christ."

"Olsson arrived in Srinagar, claiming to be Christ's '59th descendant' and seeking DNA testing of the shrine's remains.
In a series of letters to the shrine's caretakers , Olsson said she considers Rozabal a "private family tomb" . She further wrote: "My family has it (sic) origins in France, where Jesus and his wife Mary Magdalene lived for 30 years after the crucifixion. There they had two sons and one daughter. We're descendants of the son. And if you wish to know more, I refer you to a book called Bloodline of the Holy Grail by Sir Lawrence Gardner." Olsson went on to add that she was considering moving court to press her claim and secure the right to exhume the tomb. "We feel any claims you make about the sanctity of the grave are invalid ... we would prefer to move our grandfather (out of Srinagar).''
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...us-buried-in-Srinagar/articleshow/5906304.cms
It is strong clue. Empty tomb did not tell that Jesus ascended to sky. It is a wrong notion.
Regards

 

[First Baseman]

Still can't face the music eh? In any case, still not response.

My response to your post told you that I don't agree at all with your post. In other words I totally disagree with what you said.

 

[paarsurrey]

Further to post #196 above. Jesus' remains would be found where he journeyed to.
“Jesus’ Deliverance from the Cross & Journey to INDIA”

“I have written this knol so that by adducing proofs from
established facts, conclusive historical evidence of proven
value, and ancient documents of other nations, I might
dispel the serious misconceptions which are current among
Christians and most Muslim sects regarding the earlier and
the later life of Jesus.

Christians and most Muslims believe that Jesus was
raised to the heavens alive; both have believed for a long
time that Jesus is still alive in the heavens and will return to
the earth sometime in the latter days.”
Citation
marathakam abhijith. Jesus in India….FACT OR FLAW!!: THE FIRST SIDE..... [Internet]. Version 1. Abhijith's Knols. 2010 Jun 28. Available from: https://abhijithmarathakam.wordpress.com/article/jesus-in-india-fact-or-flaw-33u5226e1zr9g-8/.
Regards

 

[First Baseman]

"It is strong clue. Empty tomb did not tell that Jesus ascended to sky. It is a wrong notion."

As a matter of fact we have eyewitness testimony that Jesus both rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. It is the correct notion.

 

[paarsurrey]

"It is strong clue. Empty tomb did not tell that Jesus ascended to sky. It is a wrong notion."
As a matter of fact we have eyewitness testimony that Jesus both rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. It is the correct notion.

Please list names of the witnesses , their antecedents and other information about them.
Regards