|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: If we found the bones of Jesus
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Would that destroy Christianity?
Then I thought, "No, God could just have created a new body for Jesus Christ."
But then I thought, if a person receives a second body, would it still be the same person?
[ 10. October 2013, 01:30: Message edited by: Anglican_Brat ]
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Just to repeat a joke I posted recently,
A Dominican, a Benedictine, and a Jesuit go to Israel for an archeological dig. They discover a tomb marked "Jesus of Nazareth, Son of Joseph, crucified by Pontius Pilate" with bones inside.
The Dominican cries "Everything the Church teaches is a lie!"
The Benedictine insists "We must build a shrine for these holy bones."
The Jesuit says "What do you know, he did exist."
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
How would that be authenticated? It's unknowable at this late date.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Just to repeat a joke I posted recently,
A Dominican, a Benedictine, and a Jesuit go to Israel for an archeological dig. They discover a tomb marked "Jesus of Nazareth, Son of Joseph, crucified by Pontius Pilate" with bones inside.
The Dominican cries "Everything the Church teaches is a lie!"
The Benedictine insists "We must build a shrine for these holy bones."
The Jesuit says "What do you know, he did exist."
Lovely, may I repost?
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Of course. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I dunno. Wondering about that other thread about space aliens. What if we found out Jesus was a Martian? Just as likely I think.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Desert Daughter
Shipmate
# 13635
|
Posted
1. It would require us to re-think (but not necessarily do away with) the theology of incarnation.
2. Linked to (1), the Counil of Chalcedon would need to be re-visited (the Nestorians could make a comeback...!!)
3. Where would these bones be found? Presumably on the territory of what today is Israel. Oh dear. Time for another crusade. And then time for some serious bickering among the Christian nations about who should be the Guardian of The Bones. Yeehaaaa...
3. the bombshell of this discovery would move women bishops, gay marriages, contraception, the pope's new old cars and other trivia to the background. Where they belonged in the first place.
--------------------
"Prayer is the rejection of concepts." (Evagrius Ponticus)
Posts: 733 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
It would be utterly irrelevant. As David Jenkins said, the Resurrection is not about "a conjuring trick with old bones".
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
Dan Brown and his cronies have already found them. Jesus' descendants live in France (as last heard).
Sensible people, I think.
Makes no nevermind to a Christian.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
It seems to me there are two questions.
a) If someone claimed to have found the bones would you believe them?
b) If you really were forced by the evidence to believe them (not sure how but say you were) what would we say about Christianity?
For a) I could only imagine quite weak levels of evidence being available to demonstrate they really were Jesus' bones. Hence my "pre-test" belief that Jesus was resurrected would survive this weak challenge.
On b) I guess it demonstrates how much one's faith depends on a literal resurrection (and/or literal ascension). In my case I do believe in the former and so it would make me struggle. I probably would go on with some form of belief but it would be very much weaker in faith and practice, and I imagine would gradually dwindle.
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
It seems to me there are two questions.
a) If someone claimed to have found the bones would you believe them?
b) If you really were forced by the evidence to believe them (not sure how but say you were) what would we say about Christianity?
For a) I could only imagine quite weak levels of evidence being available to demonstrate they really were Jesus' bones. Hence my "pre-test" belief that Jesus was resurrected would survive this weak challenge.
On b) I guess it demonstrates how much one's faith depends on a literal resurrection (and/or literal ascension). In my case I do believe in the former and so it would make me struggle. I probably would go on with some form of belief but it would be very much weaker in faith and practice, and I imagine would gradually dwindle.
Quite agree, and love the joke too.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
It seems to me very unlikely that there could be evidence of Jesus' bones. Unless the Gospel accounts are complete fiction, the one fact of the Easter weekend that all parties seem to agree on is that the tomb was empty, the body was missing. If the body had been removed and hidden, it seems unlikely that any information identifying it would have been left with it.
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Would that destroy Christianity?
Then I thought, "No, God could just have created a new body for Jesus Christ."
But then I thought, if a person receives a second body, would it still be the same person?
Such questions are pointless and rather silly, if you ask me. However, since you asked the question...
The answer is yes. If it was not the same Christ who rose from the dead and ascended into heaven as the one who died on the cross then we have no hope either.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
What lies behind these "what if...?" scenarios?
Are they just an exercise of the imagination?
Hypothesis type A: "What if you dropped a 2kg iron ball off the top of the leaning tower of Pisa and it floated in the air, would you still believe in the law of gravity?"
I think most people would regard such a hypothesis as so frivolous as to be nothing more than a waste of breath.
Or is this hypothesising an indication of doubt? Or perhaps even an attempt to sow doubt in the minds of believers?
Hypothesis type B: "What if tomorrow a bunker full of chemical weapons was discovered in Iraq with clear evidence of the late Saddam Hussein's involvement, would you still believe that Blair's dodgy dossier was actually dodgy?"
That sounds like a far more sensible hypothesis to consider, given that we cannot be 100% sure that Saddam Hussein did actually get rid of all his WMD.
So which category are we talking about, when considering the resurrection of Jesus?
Is the hypothesis a plausible position, or not?
I think, as an intellectual exercise, it hovers between the two, but is nearer to 'A' than 'B'. I am completely convinced that such bones will never be found, but I guess we must still consider the possibility as an exercise in processing evidence, if nothing else.
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Would that destroy Christianity?
As far as I am concerned, yes. I would still be a philosophical theist, and I would still value some of the Christian insights. But if I were convinced that Christ's bones have been found, I would drop Christianity basically instantly and consider other religious options anew. (As others have commented, it is really hard to see how a convincing case for some bones being those of Christ could be made now. But we can assume for the sake of the discussion that this somehow is possible.)
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I think what I am really asking about is the physicality of the Resurrection. One priest to me once preached that we do not have the same molecules that we had when we were born. In effect, the body I have now is not the same body as I had when I was born.
So in that regard he made the point that the notion that the Resurrection body of the risen Lord is identical to the pre-Easter body of Jesus of Nazareth is superfluous. Now for Easter faith of course, there needs to be continuity between the pre-Easter Jesus and the post-Easter Christ (To use Marcus Borg's terminology) There needs to be a single Subject.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I think what I am really asking about is the physicality of the Resurrection. One priest to me once preached that we do not have the same molecules that we had when we were born. In effect, the body I have now is not the same body as I had when I was born.
There is however no discontinuity in your body as you grow up. Rather there is an ongoing dynamics there which is always replacing some molecules, but never all.
It is a really interesting question whether some kind of bodily continuity must be maintained in the resurrection. I just think that Jesus is precisely not the Person to ask this about. Because clearly in the case of Jesus a resurrection that included the re-uptake of His corpse in some manner was a symbolic act, and necessary in that symbolic sense given the social circumstances. The disciples needed to find the tomb empty, even if it were the case that "technically" Jesus' resurrection body could be entirely unrelated to His previous material body.
It could be the case that for most people their resurrection bodies do not have any kind of direct continuity to their previous material bodies. Possibly one could make this argument based on the sharing of molecules that must be going on. (If lots of my body is made up of molecules that once were in other people's bodies, then who is going to get those molecules?) However, I would still maintain that finding Christ's remains would kill Christianity, since Christianity is effectively founded on not finding Christ's remains...
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I think what I am really asking about is the physicality of the Resurrection. One priest to me once preached that we do not have the same molecules that we had when we were born. In effect, the body I have now is not the same body as I had when I was born.
So in that regard he made the point that the notion that the Resurrection body of the risen Lord is identical to the pre-Easter body of Jesus of Nazareth is superfluous. Now for Easter faith of course, there needs to be continuity between the pre-Easter Jesus and the post-Easter Christ (To use Marcus Borg's terminology) There needs to be a single Subject.
No one said identical. The same body but transfigured.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
As we're dealing with outlandish hypotheticals to start with, what if it could be shown that the bones were indeed Jesus', but they also provided physical evidence that He had been crucified and died but then lived for several months afterwards?
To put it another way, what if the bones proved the Resurrection but disproved the Ascension?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Anglican_Brat: One priest to me once preached that we do not have the same molecules that we had when we were born.
This is an urban myth. Quite a number of our molecules (and even cells) stay with us from our birth to our death.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I am cynical enough to believe that plenty of Christians would carry on as if nothing was different.
I might become Jewish. I dunno.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by QLib:
It would be utterly irrelevant. As David Jenkins said, the Resurrection is not about "a conjuring trick with old bones".
Well ISTR Jenkins said that it was "more than a conjuring trick with bones".
I can go with that insofar as the resurrection is more than a resuscitation. The new life is more than the old life.
I think he's wrong though if he's implying that the resurrection is "not physical but purely spiritual" and that the physical resurrection is irrelevant.
A "purely spiritual resurrection" would be un-Incarnational, kind of Gnostic - "The body doesn't matter, only the spirit..." - Bones are important, just as much part of us as anything else! Why shouldn't God redeem and resurrect them?
Besides, the early Church kind of pinned its colours to the mast on this one.
So yes, I think pretty devastating. A Gnostic-ky sort of belief might still be tenable.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
As we're dealing with outlandish hypotheticals to start with, what if it could be shown that the bones were indeed Jesus', but they also provided physical evidence that He had been crucified and died but then lived for several months afterwards?
To put it another way, what if the bones proved the Resurrection but disproved the Ascension?
No good. Not a proper Resurrection then, only a resuscitation - just some more of the old life, not the new life. Actually probably worse than Jenkins' idea.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Desert Daughter
It would require us to re-think (but not necessarily do away with) the theology of incarnation.
Maybe it would lead to a Christian theology of RE-incarnation?
But I remember some sage, maybe Lewis or Muggeridge, being asked the same question and replying, "those precious, precious bones."
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
How would that be authenticated? It's unknowable at this late date.
Well, they didn't seem to have any trouble "authenticating" splinters from the True Cross, the Manger, Mary Magdalene's pet cat's scratching post, or God knows what else. I'm sure they'd find a way.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I assumed we were talking just pure hypotheticals here. IF we could prove beyond doubt that the resurrection never happened...
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
How would that be authenticated? It's unknowable at this late date.
Well, they didn't seem to have any trouble "authenticating" splinters from the True Cross, the Manger, Mary Magdalene's pet cat's scratching post, or God knows what else.
What happens these days is that some people are convinced, but most of the world's Christians remain unimpressed. I don't see how 'the bones of Jesus' would escape such a fate. Such 'authentication' wouldn't really solve anything, but simply create yet another reason for Christians to disagree with each other!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
What IngoB said. If Christ is not raised, then we are of all men most to be pitied.
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
How would that be authenticated? It's unknowable at this late date.
Well, they didn't seem to have any trouble "authenticating" splinters from the True Cross, the Manger, Mary Magdalene's pet cat's scratching post, or God knows what else. I'm sure they'd find a way.
Uh, yeah. Like I trust all of those. I doubt you believe every claimed relic from antiquity is authentic, either. Remember St. James' Ossuary a few years back? So many people got so excited. Turned out to be a hoax. Is the Shroud of Turin really Jesus' burial cloth? We cannot possibly know at this date.
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I assumed we were talking just pure hypotheticals here. IF we could prove beyond doubt that the resurrection never happened...
Then it would be a very different kind of world than the one we inhabit.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The advantage of calling it a "hypothetical" is that we don't have to do the work of imagining how such a situation came about.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The advantage of calling it a "hypothetical" is that we don't have to do the work of imagining how such a situation came about.
Then see the above comment about dropping 2-ton weights from the top of the Tower of Pisa. If we're imagining an immovable force meeting an irresistible object, then anything goes. If we found and verified Jesus' bones, I'd sell my purple cow and buy a time machine.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Which, mysteriously, hasn't prevented you from answering what this hypothetical is actually getting at, "What IngoB said. If Christ is not raised, then we are of all men most to be pitied."
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Which, mysteriously, hasn't prevented you from answering what this hypothetical is actually getting at, "What IngoB said. If Christ is not raised, then we are of all men most to be pitied."
Yes. The question, "If Jesus didn't rise from the dead but just decomposed in the grave, would it change your faith?" is an interesting and telling question about the nature and content of Christian faith, so I answered it.
The question, "If we could prove beyond a doubt that we found Jesus' femur, would would that mean to you?" requires so much suspension of disbelief (and I don't mean religious belief) it becomes anything-goes woo-woo land.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I'm not disagreeing with you, MT. I fully understand that it would be impossible to prove beyond a doubt that said femur was Jesus'. I was just wondering if it was possible to, just for the sake of thought experimenting, throw epistemology to the wind and think about how you would build a theology around the discovery of Jesus' femur.
The OP suggested that Jesus' resurrection could be a new creation. Others have said, ourselves included, that the Christian faith would have been a botch from the start. For myself, I say so because, while it is certainly much more, the resurrection can be nothing less than meat and bones getting up and walking again.
[ 10. October 2013, 16:43: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I hope the humanism I have gained in Christ would survive my loss of Him.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The OP suggested that [should Jesus' femur be discovered,] Jesus' resurrection could be a new creation. Others have said, ourselves included, that the Christian faith would have been a botch from the start. For myself, I say so because, while it is certainly much more, the resurrection can be nothing less than meat and bones getting up and walking again.
Yep. Destroy this temple and I will raise it up again. Not raise up some other temple with certain similarities.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
In a sense it does not matter. If Christ's death reconciles us with God, no matter how, then the resurrection is non-essential. I do not think we would be good at believing it though. In some ways the fact that Christ had completed the deal and did not need to return makes to do so, makes it so awesome.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
In a sense it does not matter. If Christ's death reconciles us with God, no matter how, then the resurrection is non-essential.
This is why a soteriology that ends at the cross is one of the most dangerous falsehoods to emerge from the Reformation.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I am cynical enough to believe that plenty of Christians would carry on as if nothing was different.
Indeed so . I daresay I'd be one of those .
Having never really got past toe-dipping re Christian faith , I don't think the DNA verified bones of Jesus would make me remove my toe from a belief in the , not clearly defined , 'Other' .
The man Jesus died believing his death would not be the end . The discovery of his bones wouldn't alter that.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
In a sense it does not matter. If Christ's death reconciles us with God, no matter how, then the resurrection is non-essential.
This is why a soteriology that ends at the cross is one of the most dangerous falsehoods to emerge from the Reformation.
Ohfergoshsakes. Why are you pinning THAT on the Reformation????
I'm a freakin' 16th century dinosaur Lutheran, and the Resurrection is as important or more than the cross. Which no one I know IRL denies.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
This seems to me to be as facile as the Shroud of Turin myth.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Well, they didn't seem to have any trouble "authenticating" splinters from the True Cross, the Manger, Mary Magdalene's pet cat's scratching post, or God knows what else. I'm sure they'd find a way.
Uh, yeah. Like I trust all of those. I doubt you believe every claimed relic from antiquity is authentic, either.
My point precisely. I don't.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The OP suggested that [should Jesus' femur be discovered,] Jesus' resurrection could be a new creation. Others have said, ourselves included, that the Christian faith would have been a botch from the start. For myself, I say so because, while it is certainly much more, the resurrection can be nothing less than meat and bones getting up and walking again.
Yep. Destroy this temple and I will raise it up again. Not raise up some other temple with certain similarities.
That would seem to contradict Paul's idea of a new, nor re, creation in 1 Cor 15: quote:
what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body...What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. ....It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. ...flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.....the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Zach82: quote:
I fully understand that it would be impossible to prove beyond a doubt that said femur was Jesus'. I was just wondering if it was possible to, just for the sake of thought experimenting, throw epistemology to the wind and think about how you would build a theology around the discovery of Jesus' femur.
Count me in with Mousethief and IngoB. I don't see how you could maintain the Christian orthodox view of Jesus if you could prove that those old bones you found belonged to him. But at this distance in time it would be impossible to prove; Jesus, Mary and Joseph are all common names so finding a grave labelled 'Jesus bar Joseph' that is dateable to roughly the right period in history doesn't mean much. Just as proving that the Turin Shroud was really used to wrap a crucified corpse sometime in the first century AD wouldn't prove that it's THE shroud.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
That would seem to contradict Paul's idea of a new, nor re, creation in 1 Cor 15:
I'd say that's pretty good proof you're misreading Paul. The tomb was empty. End of.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
This seems to me to be as facile as the Shroud of Turin myth.
The Shroud might well be genuine.
Except for that pesky carbon dating they did which definitively proved it wasn't.
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
This reminds me of the old notion that someone might dig up the privy of the first-century house of Lazarus in Bethany and analyze the contents. Imagine the headlines!
The premise of the original post involves assuming something that seems wildly unlikely. If someone turns up with such bones, it is easy to think of ways one could prove they are not the bones of Jesus, but practically impossible to think of a way to prove they are his bones.
A similar argument is about the Shroud of Turin. It may or may not be the shroud of Jesus. One can readily imagine finding proof that it is not his shroud, but again, there is no way to prove that it actually is his shroud.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
This seems to me to be as facile as the Shroud of Turin myth.
The Shroud might well be genuine.
Except for that pesky carbon dating they did which definitively proved it wasn't.
Carbon dating done by taking fragments which wouldn't spoil the main part of the cloth and which were, therefore, part of the medieval fabric used for mending the shroud after fire.
quote:
"The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic,"...[The radiocarbon sample] has obvious painting medium, a dye and a mordant that doesn't show anywhere else," ...."This stuff was manipulated - it was coloured on purpose.[The radiocarbon sample] has obvious painting medium, a dye and a mordant that doesn't show anywhere else," "The radiocarbon sample cannot be older than about AD 1290, agreeing with the age determined in 1988. However, the shroud itself is actually much older."
Rogers, retired chemist from Los Alamos National aboratory in New Mexico, US.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Would that destroy Christianity?
As far as I am concerned, yes. I would still be a philosophical theist, and I would still value some of the Christian insights. But if I were convinced that Christ's bones have been found, I would drop Christianity basically instantly and consider other religious options anew.
Same for me.
It wouldn't greatly affect the reasons for believing in God. Christian ethics would still be valuable. Jesus' teaching and character would still be one of the glories of the story of religion. But the specifically Christian story would be finished.
It would, IMO, have been possible for Jesus to have been resurrected spiritually, or in a new material body, but that is not what the apostles bore witness to. The accounts are of a physical resurrection of the same body that was crucified. That's what they proclaimed as the gospel. If that turns out to be untrue, we have little more reason to believe that Christ had some other sort of resurrection than we do to believe that of any other good or holy person. If the remarkable thing which the apostles did claim is false, why would we believe that a remarkable thing true which they did not claim?
And that would have consequences about how far I could trust in Jesus for salvation. I'd still believe that God was good, and that Jesus, being good in the way I hope that God is, would still represent a way to live that I hope would be God pleasing. But since I fail when I try to live that way, I would find it hard to think that his life has materially improved my chances of seeing heaven.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
