RE: Did Jesus Christ exist as a historical human or was he a theological construct?
June 6, 2010 at 7:00 pm
Yes, keep searching.
The Israel Antiquities Authority press release....I'd find it for you if I thought you'd bother reading it... specified that the handful of pottery shards were from the Early Roman Period which it then went on to define as the first AND second centuries AD. We know there was a settlement there by the second century so this is hardly news. Moreover, the fairly well respected xtian scholar, Stephen Pfann has already excavated and found a single, family farm on the site. So what? In order for your stories to be true "Nazareth" would have had to have been a going concern during the first century BC. The fact that Josephus and Vespasian maneuvered their armies over the spot and never mentioned a town at all...let alone "Nazareth" is pretty compelling evidence that it grew up later.
As far as the "bath house" goes, again...so what? The Romans (and their Byzantine offshoots) loved bath houses. They were major recreational centers in any ROMAN town, ( i.e. not "Jewish.") As Wiki notes:
"In the mid-1990s, shopkeeper Elias Shama discovered tunnels under his shop near Mary's Well in Nazareth. The tunnels were eventually recognized as a hypocaust (a space below the floor into which warm air was pumped) for a bathhouse. The surrounding site was excavated in 1997-98 by Yardena Alexandre, and the archaeological remains exposed were ascertained to date from the Roman, Crusader, Mamluk and Ottoman periods."
Direct Roman rule of Galilee did not begin until 44 AD when Herod Agrippa I died. Within 10 years, his son Herod Agrippa II was king of an area larger than Herod the Great's kingdom because for whatever reason the Romans felt compelled to keep dumping the region back onto a Herodian. In any case, after Herod Agrippa II's death (c 95 ) Galilee reverted to direct Roman rule, along with everything else.
Listen, I do understand your willingness to jump to conclusions but it is the same sort of thing every time some moron shouts "I found NOAH'S FUCKING ARK!!!" Believers get all excited because apparently they are willing to suspend reason any time there is any claim made that seems to support their deepest desires. Note that the announcement of the "Jesus House" ( which was usually edited to avoid the implications of the IAA's press release) was timed to right around christmas. You know, if there is one thing that the Israelis and Palestinians agree on it is the desirability of separating xtian pilgrims from their money.
For that matter the Fransciscan order purchased the site in 1620 from the Ottomans (Turks). The population had been massacred during the Crusades ( by Arabs the last time ) and was uninhabited for some 3 centuries prior to the arrival of the Turks. So the Franciscans show up, build a church and make all sorts of claims about it. It really isn't all that different from what the Arabs and Israelis do, is it? You aren't catholic. You're not supposed to be impressed by all this relic crap.
The Israel Antiquities Authority press release....I'd find it for you if I thought you'd bother reading it... specified that the handful of pottery shards were from the Early Roman Period which it then went on to define as the first AND second centuries AD. We know there was a settlement there by the second century so this is hardly news. Moreover, the fairly well respected xtian scholar, Stephen Pfann has already excavated and found a single, family farm on the site. So what? In order for your stories to be true "Nazareth" would have had to have been a going concern during the first century BC. The fact that Josephus and Vespasian maneuvered their armies over the spot and never mentioned a town at all...let alone "Nazareth" is pretty compelling evidence that it grew up later.
As far as the "bath house" goes, again...so what? The Romans (and their Byzantine offshoots) loved bath houses. They were major recreational centers in any ROMAN town, ( i.e. not "Jewish.") As Wiki notes:
"In the mid-1990s, shopkeeper Elias Shama discovered tunnels under his shop near Mary's Well in Nazareth. The tunnels were eventually recognized as a hypocaust (a space below the floor into which warm air was pumped) for a bathhouse. The surrounding site was excavated in 1997-98 by Yardena Alexandre, and the archaeological remains exposed were ascertained to date from the Roman, Crusader, Mamluk and Ottoman periods."
Direct Roman rule of Galilee did not begin until 44 AD when Herod Agrippa I died. Within 10 years, his son Herod Agrippa II was king of an area larger than Herod the Great's kingdom because for whatever reason the Romans felt compelled to keep dumping the region back onto a Herodian. In any case, after Herod Agrippa II's death (c 95 ) Galilee reverted to direct Roman rule, along with everything else.
Listen, I do understand your willingness to jump to conclusions but it is the same sort of thing every time some moron shouts "I found NOAH'S FUCKING ARK!!!" Believers get all excited because apparently they are willing to suspend reason any time there is any claim made that seems to support their deepest desires. Note that the announcement of the "Jesus House" ( which was usually edited to avoid the implications of the IAA's press release) was timed to right around christmas. You know, if there is one thing that the Israelis and Palestinians agree on it is the desirability of separating xtian pilgrims from their money.
For that matter the Fransciscan order purchased the site in 1620 from the Ottomans (Turks). The population had been massacred during the Crusades ( by Arabs the last time ) and was uninhabited for some 3 centuries prior to the arrival of the Turks. So the Franciscans show up, build a church and make all sorts of claims about it. It really isn't all that different from what the Arabs and Israelis do, is it? You aren't catholic. You're not supposed to be impressed by all this relic crap.
