My Historian Challenge

[Subduction Zone]

Are you ignorant by tomorrow's standards?

If so, what's with calling them ignorant?

You are mistakenly trying to live your life by their teachings. That is what is ignorant. There is nothing wrong with pointing out that they probably did not know that the Earth was not flat and therefore they wrote as if the Earth was flat. Their flaws could be corrected by education. No one is claiming that they could not have been educated.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because they were still bronze age, desert(well, -ish) dwelling, ignorant goat herders. The only thing that would change was that the majority of them lived in static semi-urban dwellings.

Who are the ignorant ones, Warden?

Those who were actually there, or scientists today who like to play their uniformitarian card and pretend they know what went on back then?

Case in point:

Why do smart scientists today say they used bronze back then, when they put in writing they used brass?

Let me guess:

They didn't know the difference ... right?

Most modern scientists today are nothing more than myopic, abortion age, goat worshipping (Satanic), urban witches.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Who are the ignorant ones, Warden?

Those who were actually there, or scientists today who like to play their uniformitarian card and pretend they know what went on back then?

Case in point:

Why do smart scientists today say they used bronze back then, when they put in writing they used brass?

Let me guess:

They didn't know the difference ... right?

Most modern scientists today are nothing more than myopic, abortion age, goat worshipping (Satanic), urban witches.

Are you enjoying tilting at those windmills of yours, Don Quixote?

 

[AV1611VET]

There is no "Promised Land".

Yasser Arafat thought that too.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's not anti-Semitic.

On that point, I will agree.

It is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic.

 

[Mountainmike]

Agnosticism is absence of belief.

Atheism is an a priori belief. Your case a religion because of the way you clutch at discredited dating straw, whilst ignoring reams of science that disagree with you. You are clearly too lazy to look it up. Google shroud dating errors. The dating was wrong. Everyone knew it, it took a decade to show up the schoolboy errors,

better still look at the evidence that does date it, e.g. See Fantis book or numerous websites.

i cannot be bothered with further dialogue with someone who doesn't care about truth.

And Mountainmike, atheists do not make any false apriori claims. At least none that I have ever seen. It appears that you are projecting your sins upon others.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

On that point, I will agree.

It is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic.

No, it's neither. It's stating a fact: the ancient Hebrews were ignorant, desert dwelling, goat herding, bronze age nomads.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, it's neither. It's stating a fact: the ancient Hebrews were ignorant, desert dwelling, goat herding, bronze age nomads.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Thank God, I'm not.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Thank God, I'm not.

No, it's a fact. No matter how much you may not like it, it's still a fact.

 

[jayem]

Should historians be searching for Jesus' bones?

Not historians, but maybe TV producers. After shows about searching for ghosts, and Bigfoot, and Amelia Earhart, and Jimmy Hoffa, why not Jesus?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Agnosticism is absence of belief.

Correct.

Atheism is an a priori belief.

In correct. It is merely a lack of belief. Most agnostics are atheists. They do not believe in any gods.

Your case a religion because of the way you clutch at discredited dating straw, whilst ignoring reams of science that disagree with you. You are clearly too lazy to look it up. Google shroud dating errors. The dating was wrong. Everyone knew it, it took a decade to show up the schoolboy errors,

Nope, the dating was correct. There were some rather idiotic and ignorant claims made about the date that only fools those that want to be fooled. You have yet to show any assumptions on my part. Creationists assume and make the error that others do too.

better still look at the evidence that does date it, e.g. See Fantis book or numerous websites.

Your claim, it is up to you to support it. I am not going to look up some fantasy book on the internet.

i cannot be bothered with further dialogue with someone who doesn't care about truth.

Then you should not talk with yourself. If you could show that there are any facts that support your claims I would change my mind. I don't think that you can claim the same.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not historians, but maybe TV producers. After shows about searching for ghosts, and Bigfoot, and Amelia Earhart, and Jimmy Hoffa, why not Jesus?

Ya ... but who actually did the footwork?

 

[Chesterton]

Most modern scientists today are nothing more than myopic, abortion age, goat worshipping (Satanic), urban witches.

This is not true. Some of them live in rural areas.

 

[AV1611VET]

This is not true. Some of them live in rural areas.

Well-deserved LIKE for that one!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Who are the ignorant ones, Warden?

Those who were actually there, or scientists today who like to play their uniformitarian card and pretend they know what went on back then?

Case in point:

Why do smart scientists today say they used bronze back then, when they put in writing they used brass?

Let me guess:

They didn't know the difference ... right?

Most modern scientists today are nothing more than myopic, abortion age, goat worshipping (Satanic), urban witches.

The writers of the King James version were the ignorant ones in this case. They called what would be termed "bronze" today as "brass":

"Although forms of brass have been in use since prehistory,[37] its true nature as a copper-zinc alloy was not understood until the post medieval period because the zinc vapor which reacted with copper to make brass was not recognised as a metal.[38] The King James Bible makes many references to "brass".[39] The Shakespearean English form of the word 'brass' can mean any bronze alloy, or copper, rather than the strict modern definition of brass."

Brass - Wikipedia

 

[jayem]

Ya ... but who actually did the footwork?

If I were producing a Finding Jesus series, I'd cast Adam, Jamie, and the Mythbusters crew. They're thorough, and knowledgeable, and honest. Whatever they find, they'll tell it like it is.

And they'll be great at excavating. They love to blow things up.

 

[AV1611VET]

If I were producing a Finding Jesus series, I'd cast Adam, Jamie, and the Mythbusters crew. They're thorough, and knowledgeable, and honest. Whatever they find, they'll tell it like it is.

And they'll be great at excavating. They love to blow things up.

If they're smart, they'd say NO, THANK YOU -- NOT INTERESTED IN WASTING OUR TIME.

If they're scientists, they'd say OK, THANK YOU.

Then go through the motions and take your money.

 

[HitchSlap]

If they're smart, they'd say NO, THANK YOU -- NOT INTERESTED IN WASTING OUR TIME.

If they're scientists, they'd say OK, THANK YOU.

Then go through the motions and take your money.

So, given the fact that prayer doesn't work, and many itinerant preachers make their income duping little old men & ladies into giving a "love offering," in return for his blanket of prayers, sounds like you'd approve, then.

Got it.

 

[Mountainmike]

Meanwhile in the real world outside Subductions blind faith in atheism, the RC date was long ago discredited, there have been whole conferences on the shroud, many publications and books, and, by the science world at least, it is now accepted the shroud is far older, indeed the only way the mark can be simulated is high energy radiation burst. Even the Los Alamos scientist who headed up Sturp research who was long an advocate of the date, eventually agreed it was false, and that the fabric chemistry was anomalous for the age the daters claimed. He agreed a repair had been tested, not representative of the shroud.

And if subduction cared about truth he would go to countless websites , books and papers that confirm what I said. Only flat earthers like Subduction and even more hopeless cases like Joe Nickell, still believe the erroneous date because their faith in atheism seemingly demands it.

For anyone else, who is interested in truth.My suggestion is Get Fanti's book, and possibly Janice Connels book on the sudarium.
The latter gives a fascinating insight into crucifixion, the role of a sudarium in stemming blood and fluid flow. How it was folded around the head of a crucifixion fatality prior to bringing down , and the forensic correspondence of the shroud showing the RC date was silly.

But then shroud watchers already knew that. Even the daters knew the fabric was different, they said so, but conveniently did not comment on that when their date made no sense.

So please subduction? look at the facts, then comment second, is far better order than yours! What did you think of the chemical ,raman and mechanical tests that date the shroud. Fascinating heh! Or it would be if you cared about science!

[staff edited]

 

[Strathos]

There are at least half a dozen places that people claim to be the tomb of Jesus. Obviously none of them have His bones.