Why can't Christians Verify Exactly Where Jesus Was Buried?

[Firefighter01]

[quote pid='1390419' dateline='1473782576']

You're kidding aren't you?  Do you really think that Jesus had a literal family relationship?  Maybe like an ancient Jewish version of Little House on the Prairie?

Aractus
He obviously had parents.

Yes, if you believe in the Bible story, he had God as his father and the Virgin Mary as his mother.  But I asked you whether you think that Jesus of the Bible had a literal family relationship.

Ok I'm glad you think the nativity is a myth. Unless you can prove otherwise, he writes practically nothing about the Jesus of the Gospels until you get to the crucifixion and even that has none of the details contained in the Gospels. I think you would find it very hard to demonstrate that he knew of those things if he didn't write about them.

Aractus
That isn't true. Paul writes a lot about Jesus, and scholars debate exactly how much he directly cites from him.

He may have written a lot, but not what is written in the gospels about his birth, location (I don't even think he writes about Nazareth or Bethlehem), ministry, miracles apart from the resurrection, cleansing of the temple, ride into  Jerusalem, arrest, or trial.  All the stuff about him being alive on Earth in other words. 

Maybe he quotes what he dreams about Jesus in the apparitions, but what does he quote Jesus saying in the Gospel accounts?  A brother wouldn't declare himself a servant of his sibling. That's as silly as thinking that Jesus' other "brother" would say this in Jude1 "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James"  It's saying that Jude is a servant to his brother Jesus, but his real claim to fame is he is the bother of James, lol!

Aractus
Right, so you don't have an argument then since you can't tell me what was and wasn't normal literary custom in those times regarding titles. Anyway like I said I don't care which James wrote James.

"Brethren" and brother was used for members of a ancient religious order, the same as sisterhood  http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini...h/brethren

As I have said previously, "brothers" and "sisters" were titles of followers, not necessarily blood relations.

Aractus
Right so why doesn't Paul use that title then?

He does. 1 Corinthians 15King James Version (KJV) is an example.

15 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

My only problem with Hurtado is that he seeks to define the problem according to his own bias.  This is a common failing of theologians.  He's hardly alone.

What do you have against Michael Scott, what possible bias are you going to claim he has seeing as he's a historian of ancient Greece-Rome and that's his focus, (i.e. he's not an NT scholar, but perfectly qualified to answer questions on historicity nonetheless)?

Furthermore this documentary series he has writing credits for (as well as narrates) is excellent: at the same quality as Bible Unearthed, many of the facts presented are not what Christians would want to hear - it is very neutral:

https://youtu.be/W1XuyWoRUc0

Firefighter01
He isn't though.  I note that he was educated at Christ's College. I find it hard to believe that you dismiss the nativity stories, yet you and Scott are convinced of the trial and crucifixion stories.  I wouldn't find it hard to believe that Scott probably thinks the nativity stories are fair dinkum too.