The Historical Christ

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

DAGDA- The Garden of Eden in its earthly sense was based on Dilmun.

I'm not entirely sure that claim may be made as fact. I think it's fair to say the known facts allow a conclusion of "might have been" or even "probably" but not "was definitely". Certainty is rare in ancient history. Perhaps partly because the discipline of history as we know it did not exist in any consistent way before Gibbon.

I haven't read anything about the tomb of Jesus. I DID see an interesting documentary about an ossuary possibly containing the bones of Jesus' family.This claim was made due to the name combinations. I think from memory,it may have been James, Joseph and Mary. It was explained that the names we translate as Jesus, Mary Joseph and James were quite common at the time ,although not so common within one family. Considering that statement, I found the idea of any link to Jesus to be tenuous.

The other problem I have is using the gospels as the premise for any serious archeological or historical claims. I have seen no evidence which convinces me the gospels are more than myth. The commonly held belief that most myths have some truth is not supported by evidence.--SOME myths are loosely based on some actual person(s) or events. Most are not. (Anthropology 101)