Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN: Archaeologists Report 1st Direct Evidence of Jesus
Oct. 21, 2002 | CNN

Posted on 10/21/2002 9:04:51 AM PDT by jern

BREAKING: Archaeologists Report 1st Direct Evidence of Jesus


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: biblicalarcheology; bones; boxofbones; epigraphyandlanguage; faithandphilosophy; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; gospelofjesuswife; hewasarabbi; james; jamescameron; jamesossuary; jesus; jesustomb; karenking; letshavejerusalem; losttombofjesus; mariame; mariamne; marymagdalene; ossuary; rabbismarry; sectarianturmoil; simchajacobovici; talpiot; talpiottomb; weddingatcana
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 341-354 next last
To: Lyford
How come I never get to the threads soon enough to get the good zingers? I posted it anyway, before I read yours...
121 posted on 10/21/2002 12:26:30 PM PDT by HeadOn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
Could have been worse, I mean, he could have owned a Matiz! *L*

He probably considered it, but got the donkey because he wanted something a little more powerful. ;)

Love, Ivan

122 posted on 10/21/2002 12:28:37 PM PDT by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Mary was amongst the people the Holy Spirit descended upon the day of Pentecost. If she "was just a vessel chosen to carry the blessed child. A womb, but that's all," why would she have been chosen to be present on this day? This is only one example of the pick-and-choose Scripture attitude of certain Christians.

Why were the rest chosen to be there that day? What did they do "special" enough to be there? It seems Mary blended in with the rest of the gang.

123 posted on 10/21/2002 12:28:59 PM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: LibertyGirl77
You can't say that applies to EVERYONE whose commented on this. Often, the Catholics here are responding to "Catholics are idolaters," "Catholics don't follow the Bible," and "Catholics are Mary-worshipers" comments and comments are along those lines. If you look at some of the responses to those comments, it may seem that there is "contempt" in the comments. But if the originial comments aren't read, that's the impression that you will get. Some may actually be showing contempt, but you can't say EVERYONE is doing that. Maybe some aren't trying to win converts, but to win the argument...
124 posted on 10/21/2002 12:30:14 PM PDT by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
He probably considered it, but got the donkey because he wanted something a little more powerful. ;)

Ouch!!!!

....someone will be walking in future!!! *L*

125 posted on 10/21/2002 12:31:34 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
After she had her blessing, her job was complete.

Not exactly. The disciple whom Jesus loved was entrusted to whose care at Calvary?

A serrogate son. So? That way, a mothers loss would be less painful. He could care for her until she died, too. It sounds reasonable to me. Not holy, but a sign of a loving son.

126 posted on 10/21/2002 12:33:53 PM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
....someone will be walking in future!!! *L*

That's OK, darling. In London, walking is faster than driving. ;)

Love, Ivan

127 posted on 10/21/2002 12:33:55 PM PDT by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: katana
At the risk of giving away one of my best secret advantages, I'll tell you that you DO have a bible right in front of you.

If you are on the internet, you can get a Bible. I use www.olivetree.com. It has several different translations (NIV is copyrighted and not available) and a good search feature, if you know some of the words of the verse/passage you are looking for. You can also download to a Palm or other PDA. God Bless.
128 posted on 10/21/2002 12:35:58 PM PDT by HeadOn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona; Ready2go; ksen; Thinkin' Gal; Siobhan; american colleen; sinkspur; livius; ...
Luke says first-born son. But, James was not a full brother to Jesus.

Perhaps the following will clarify the position.

MATTHEW 13:55-56, and MARK 6:3, both say, "Is not this the carpenter, the Son of Mary, the brother of JAMES, and JO'SES (JOSEPH), and of JUDE and SIMON? And are not His sisters here with us?" (Note! Only the 'carpenter' is called 'THE Son of Mary', not 'A Son of Mary') Some people refer to these verses as 'proof', that Mary had other children. See also: Mt 12:46, Mk 3:31, Lk 8:19, Jn 7:5, Let us examine this more closely, using your bible...

The word: 'Brethren'...appears over 530 times in the Bible.
'Brother'....appears over 350 times.
'Brothers'...appears only once, in Num 36:11.
'Sister'.....appears over 100 times.
'Sisters'....appears over 15 times.

BRETHREN: This is a plural word for 'brother' as shown in dictionaries. BROTHER: The Hebrew word 'ACH', is ordinarily translated 'brother'. Since Hebrew, and Aramaic in which the Gospel of Matthew was written, had fewer words than our English, the Jews at that time, used it in a broader sense to expresses kinship. The Hebrew terms for different levels and degrees of relationship did not exist. 'Brother' meant the sons of the same father, and all the male members of the same clan or tribe. In Greek, in which the Gospel of Mark was written, 'brother' is Phratry, from the Greek Phrater, meaning a fellow member of a clan. Even today, the word is used in a larger meaning, so that friends, allies, fellow believers, and fellow citizens can be included in the same brotherhood. It was no different in the time of Christ.

Four dictionaries I have checked list three or four classes of meanings of the word 'brother'. The first class concerns sons of the same parents. The other two or three classes say, kinsman, fellow man, a close friend, a pal, a member of a religious order, a fellow member of a Christian Church, etc. How many times have you seen T.V. Evangelists address their audiences as 'Our brothers and sisters'? Marian detracters accept the last three meanings to suit themselves, but when it comes to Mary, the mother of GOD, they always refer to the first meaning. Is this fair to her? How do you explain this?

See: Num 8:26, 1Sam 30:23, 2Sam 1:26, 1King 9:13, 2Chron 29:34. For Example...

If you will read Gen 29:15, "And Laban said to Jacob, because thou art my brother..." At first you would think Jacob and Laban are blood brothers. Now compare Gen 29:5, "..know ye Laban, the son of Nahor..." Compare Gen 25:21-26, and you will see Jacob was the son of Isaac and Rebekah. Laban was the son of Nahor. They were not blood brothers but fellow citizens.

Christ tells the Multitude and His disciples in Mt 23:1-8, "AND ALL YE ARE BRETHREN." In Mt 12:50 and Mk 3:35, Jesus says, "For whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in Heaven, the same is my 'BROTHER', and 'SISTER', and MOTHER." That verse says it all.

In 1Cor 15:6, Jesus appeared to five hundred 'brothers' at one time. Could all of these be blood brothers? Hardly. Then there is Peter speaking before one hundred and twenty brothers in Acts 1:15-16. Paul speaks of one 'called a brother', in 1Cor 5:11. The Bible has many more similar verses.

Now we have four 'brothers', JAMES, JO'SES, SIMON, and JUDE to account for as written in Mk 6:3...

Mk 15:40, "There were also women looking on afar off: among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of JAMES the less, and of JO'SES, and Salome." These people were at the crucifixion.

Jn 19:25, "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother (Mary) and His mothers sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene."

Mt 10:2-3, "...'JAMES' the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddeus." Alphaeus is an alternate translation of Cleophas (Clophas) and so he is the same person.

Acts 1:13, "...JAMES, the son of Alphaeus, and SIMON Zelo'tes, and JUDE the brother of JAMES."

From these four passages, we see we have another 'Mary', who was the wife of Cleophas (Alphaeus), and the mother of three of Jesus's 'brethren', JAMES (the less), and JO'SES, and JUDE. This clearly shows that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was not the mother of JAMES, JO'SES, and JUDE of Mk 6:3. To keep Mk 6:3 in harmony, since three are not children of Mary, the mother of Jesus, then SIMON is not either. SIMON is the Canaanite Mk 3:18, also called the 'Zealot' (Zelo'tes), Mt 10:4, Lk 6:15, Acts 1:13. Jude, who authored the Epistle of Jude, says he is the brother of James in Jude 1:1. Jude was also called 'Thaddeus' in Mt 10:3, and in Mk 3:18. This was to distinguish him from Judas Iscariot. Lk 6:16 further distinguishes the two by saying, "And Judas (Jude) the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor."

More on the topic of 'Mary's other children', I have another point to make...

Jn 19:26-27, "When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple standing by, whom He loved..." The disciple was John, the author of the Gospel of John. "Then He said to the disciple, BEHOLD THY MOTHER." Was John a child of Mary and blood brother of Jesus?

Read the following verses to see...

Mk 1:19, "...He saw James, the son of Zebedee, and 'JOHN', his brother."
Mk 3:17, "And James the son of Zebedee, and 'JOHN' the brother of James."

In neither of these passages is it said that Jesus saw a blood brother or even recognized them as men that He knew.

Mt 27:56, "Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James
Mt 20:20, (the less) and Jo'ses, and the mother of Zebedee's children."
Mk 15:40, "...among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James (the less), and Salome (mother of Zebedee's children)."
Lk 24:10, "It was Mary Magdalene...and Mary ('the other Mary') the mother of James (the less)..."

A comparison of Mt 27:56, and Mk 15:40, clearly shows that Zebedee had a wife whose name was Salome. She is called the 'mother of Zebedee's children' in

Mt 27:56, and 'Salome' in Mk 15:40. They had two children, JOHN and JAMES,
Mk 3:17. JOHN at the foot of the cross to whom Jesus gave His mother, was not a child of Mary, the mother of Jesus, but of Zebedee and Salome. If Jesus had blood brothers, why then did He not give His mother to them? Jewish law would have demanded it... +

GENEALOGY:

---Zebedee-----------------------------------------------
+ >------begat------James and John----------------------
---Salome------------------------------------------------ +

---Cleophas-(Alphaeus)-----------------------------------
+ >------begat------James (the less), Jo'ses, and Jude--
---Mary---(the other Mary, Mt 27:56,61, 28:1, Jn 19:25)-- +

---THE HOLY SPIRIT---------------------------------------
+ >------begat------JESUS THE CHRIST--------------------

---Mary-------------------------------------------------- +

This 'Genealogy' shows who the real parents of the 'brothers' in Mark 6:3, and Matthew 13:55, are, and makes the word 'brother' a non-argument.

Additional notes...

Mt 1:25, "And knew her not till...". The old meaning of the word 'till' or 'until', meant an action did not occur up to a certain point. It does not imply the action did occur later. Gen 8:7, "He sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, 'until' the waters were dried up off the earth."

2Sam 6:23, "...the daughter of Saul had no child 'until' the day of her death." Did she have a child after she died?

Lk 1:34, "Then said Mary unto the Angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" This shows Mary had no relations with a man before and was virgin.

Lk 2:7, "And she brought forth her 'firstborn' Son and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes..." Firstborn, at the time of the writing of the Gospels, meant, 'the child that opened the womb'. See Ex 13:2 and Num 3:12.

Firstborn does not imply that Mary had other children, as an ONLY son, IS a 'FIRSTBORN SON'. The author of this letter is one.

NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT MARY, THE MOTHER OF JESUS, HAD OTHER CHILDREN. WHY THEN, DO SOME INSIST THAT SHE DID?

Bible References: Gen 8:7, Gen 25:21-26, Gen 29:5,15, Ex 13:2, Num 3:12, Num 8:26, Deut 23:7, 1Sam 30:23, 2Sam 1:26,6:23, 1King 9:13, 2King 10:13-14, 2Chron 29:34, Mt 1:25, Mt 4:21, Mt 10:2-4, Mt 12:46, Mt *12:50, Mt 13:55-56, Mt 20:20, Mt 26:26, Mt 27:56,61, Mt 28:1, Mk 1:19, Mk 2:14, Mk 3:17-21,31,35, Mk 6:3, Mk 15:40,47, Lk 1:34, Lk 2:7 Lk 2:41-51, Lk 5:10, Lk 6:16, Lk 8:19, Lk 24:10, Jn 7:2-7, Jn 19:25-27, Acts 1:13-16, Rom 8:29, 1Cor 5:11, 1Cor 9:5, 1Cor 15:6, Gal 1:19, 1Pet 5:12, Jude 1:1

PRINTED WITH PERMISSION

129 posted on 10/21/2002 12:37:50 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
That's OK, darling. In London, walking is faster than driving. ;)

Fine! I shall wave at you in the rain ;-)

130 posted on 10/21/2002 12:42:49 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
She wasn't special here either.

Are you kidding me? How many other people that day DID NOT receive the Holy Spirit? That would be everyone else in the world. Other than the Apostles, she is the ONLY one NAMED out of all of the people who were present. This is displays some significance. This may not seem like a big deal to you, but it is. Whoever continues to discredit the Mother like this (i.e she is just a vessel, she's not "special") insults the Son.

131 posted on 10/21/2002 12:46:28 PM PDT by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
Fine! I shall wave at you in the rain ;-)

There is such a thing as umbrellas, darling. ;)

heh heh heh

Love, Ivan

132 posted on 10/21/2002 12:49:38 PM PDT by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
"Even from that perspective, if I were Joseph I would be a little hesitant to "lay myself down" with a woman who had such intimate relations with the Maker of the Universe."

I agree. I'm not a Biblical scholar or theologin...but I suspect that God took care of all of Mary's needs, without exception. I cannot imagine that He would allow the corruption of His chosen vessel to bring His Son into the world, by a mere mortal.

133 posted on 10/21/2002 12:52:11 PM PDT by grumpster-dumpster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: jern
CNN bought into this also. I think there is a chance we are being scammed.
134 posted on 10/21/2002 12:54:53 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Well presented support for your case...I cant wait to ask them for myself.
135 posted on 10/21/2002 12:55:37 PM PDT by Delbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
No one esle was up to the task so I had to find an explanation of Matthew 1:25 myself, so here goes...

The same must be said of the expression, "and he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son" (Matthew 1:25); the Evangelist tells us what did not happen before the birth of Jesus, without suggesting that it happened after his birth.

Very weak defense.

Case 1: The verse contains "He knew her". QED. If you want to expand, you can say it actually says "He knew her not till" which is different. And I say you can not interpret this to mean "He knew her not while". There is a different between "till" and "while".

Case 2: There is a difference between past tense and future tense. Consider the following two statements.

You can not go swimming until you wait 30 minutes after you finish eating.

He did not go swimming until he waited 30 minutes after he finished eathing.

In the future tense, the use of until does not imply an action. In the past tense, the use of until does imply that action.

136 posted on 10/21/2002 12:55:49 PM PDT by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Are you kidding me? How many other people that day DID NOT receive the Holy Spirit? That would be everyone else in the world.

Everyone did. That's how they were able to speak in toungs. It decended on the whole crowd, like flames upon their heads. Guess you missed that day, aye?

Other than the Apostles, she is the ONLY one NAMED out of all of the people who were present.

Imagine the list if all names were used. Get real. Why list everyone at the meeting? Does the press report everyone at a campain rally?

137 posted on 10/21/2002 12:57:12 PM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
We are not amused.


138 posted on 10/21/2002 12:58:34 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: grumpster-dumpster; MadIvan
but I suspect that God took care of all of Mary's needs, without exception.

I'd say we're fairly safe in the assumption that in this instance there was no 'dead beat dad' syndrome :-)

139 posted on 10/21/2002 1:00:52 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
Tsk tsk, darling. ;)

Love, Ivan

140 posted on 10/21/2002 1:00:56 PM PDT by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 341-354 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson