Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 10:19 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
#1
I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Because of its cover "the real Jesus: What archaeology reveals about his life".  I was curious how the article's author was going to spin the utter lack of any evidence for a historical Jesus or even a christianity before the 2nd cent CE.

And I wasn't disappointed Ms Kristin Romey, the author, conludes (though given from the first word she's assuming her answer, I'm loath to call it a conclusion) based on the findings of jewish archaeology in the majority jewish area of Gallilee and priests at these sites excitedly telling her "this is proof of Jesus".

Her dismissal of the increaingly well evidenced mysticist position is a couple of sentences from Eric Meyers of Duke and Byron McCane of Florida Atlantic, giving no context as to their expertise, credentials or why they were saying what they were saying.

The one redeeming feature of her article is that it reeks of desperation throughout, making unwarranted assertions throughout (excavations of a town at a place now known as Magdala proves Mary of Magdalene exists, Jesus being called Jesus of Nazareth proves he exists because three centuries later a town of Nazareth existed). Its as if she knows her position is untenable yet is unwilling to abandon it.

Her last sentence is indicative of her postion: "But for true believers, their faith in the life, death and resurrection of the son of god [capitalisations in original removed] will be evidence enough". Like the deluded pilgrims Ms Romey will stick to her myhology no matter how conclusively it is disproven.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli

Home
Reply
#2
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
(December 22, 2017 at 7:43 am)Wololo Wrote: Because of its cover "the real Jesus: What archaeology reveals about his life".  I was curious how the article's author was going to spin the utter lack of any evidence for a historical Jesus or even a christianity before the 2nd cent CE.

And I wasn't disappointed Ms Kristin Romey, the author, conludes (though given from the first word she's assuming her answer, I'm loath to call it a conclusion) based on the findings of jewish archaeology in the majority jewish area of Gallilee and priests at these sites excitedly telling her "this is proof of Jesus".

Her dismissal of the increaingly well evidenced mysticist position is a couple of sentences from Eric Meyers of Duke and Byron McCane of Florida Atlantic, giving no context as to their expertise, credentials or why they were saying what they were saying.

The one redeeming feature of her article is that it reeks of desperation throughout, making unwarranted assertions throughout (excavations of a town at a place now known as Magdala proves Mary of Magdalene exists, Jesus being called Jesus of Nazareth proves he exists because three centuries later a town of Nazareth existed). Its as if she knows her position is untenable yet is unwilling to abandon it.

Her last sentence is indicative of her postion: "But for true believers, their faith in the life, death and resurrection of the son of god [capitalisations in original removed] will be evidence enough". Like the deluded pilgrims Ms Romey will stick to her myhology no matter how conclusively it is disproven.

I don't like an oversell in this area, any more than you do (likely less actually).   However, I fear that your last sentence is equally over-reaching.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man.  - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire.  - Martin Luther
Reply
#3
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Ever since it was bought by Murdoch my expectations for good journalism have plummeted. You can't pick one up to leaf through for fun facts without the fear of picking up an agenda driven, misrepresented poison pill. I don't buy it any longer.
Reply
#4
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
(December 22, 2017 at 10:15 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
(December 22, 2017 at 7:43 am)Wololo Wrote: Because of its cover "the real Jesus: What archaeology reveals about his life".  I was curious how the article's author was going to spin the utter lack of any evidence for a historical Jesus or even a christianity before the 2nd cent CE.

And I wasn't disappointed Ms Kristin Romey, the author, conludes (though given from the first word she's assuming her answer, I'm loath to call it a conclusion) based on the findings of jewish archaeology in the majority jewish area of Gallilee and priests at these sites excitedly telling her "this is proof of Jesus".

Her dismissal of the increaingly well evidenced mysticist position is a couple of sentences from Eric Meyers of Duke and Byron McCane of Florida Atlantic, giving no context as to their expertise, credentials or why they were saying what they were saying.

The one redeeming feature of her article is that it reeks of desperation throughout, making unwarranted assertions throughout (excavations of a town at a place now known as Magdala proves Mary of Magdalene exists, Jesus being called Jesus of Nazareth proves he exists because three centuries later a town of Nazareth existed). Its as if she knows her position is untenable yet is unwilling to abandon it.

Her last sentence is indicative of her postion: "But for true believers, their faith in the life, death and resurrection of the son of god [capitalisations in original removed] will be evidence enough". Like the deluded pilgrims Ms Romey will stick to her myhology no matter how conclusively it is disproven.

I don't like an oversell in this area, any more than you do (likely less actually).   However, I fear that your last sentence is equally over-reaching.

Just because you don't like hearing the truth, it doesn't make it any less true.

It was obvious from the first word that the author went into the assignment believing the biblical naarative to be true and no amount of seeing the utter lack of evidence would convince her otherwise.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli

Home
Reply
#5
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Nat Geo is now fit only for the bottom of birdcages.  The christards will ruin everything if given a chance.

Archaeology has shown that there were (some) jews in Galilee.  It has nothing to say about any fucking jesus.
Reply
#6
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
(December 22, 2017 at 11:57 am)Wololo Wrote:
(December 22, 2017 at 10:15 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I don't like an oversell in this area, any more than you do (likely less actually).   However, I fear that your last sentence is equally over-reaching.

Just because you don't like hearing the truth, it doesn't make it any less true.

It was obvious from the first word that the author went into the assignment believing the biblical naarative to be true and no amount of seeing the utter lack of evidence would convince her otherwise.

Even though I didn't read the article; I was agreeing with you (in a general way)  .  I don't like when they say this could be the house of so and so, when really there only reason for thinking this, is that it may be in about the right place at the right time.  So I don't know what truth it is, that you think I don't like hearing, or that I am dismissing. 

I was however stating that (even though again, I don't have specifics and I'm speaking from past experience) that you are likely equally over reaching in your statement. I'm don't have an aversion to the truth. So if you want to talk about it, I would be happy to look at what you think has "conclusively disproven".  I hope it is better than the argument from silence, that I have seen from others.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man.  - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire.  - Martin Luther
Reply
#7
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Yeah... I was a subscriber since 1999... That ended with 2016.
I still have a backlog of some 6 magazines to read from last year... I blame books.
Reply
#8
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Quote: I don't like when they say this could be the house of so and so, when really there only reason for thinking this, is that it may be in about the right place at the right time.

Sadly that it is a carry over from the early days of archaeology in the ANE when preachers disguised as archaeologists went out with a bible in one hand and a shovel in the other to dig up "proof" of the bible.  They invariably found what they were looking for because of confirmation bias.

There is a slightly more modern take on this, though.  Marketing.  It seems that every December there is some "discovery" in Israel to make xtians feel all happy about their bullshit.  The "Jesus house" at Nazareth comes to mind instantly.  I read the press release from the IAA on that one and it correctly stated that a home had been found with a few pottery shards associated from the first and second centuries.  Obviously there is a two hundred year span there.  But even though the scholars at the IAA said nothing out of line that did not stop the headline writers from proclaiming it "the Jesus House."  You see, if there is one thing that Jews and Palestinians agree on it is the total desirability of separating idiot xtian pilgrims from their money.
Reply
#9
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
There was no character named "Jesus" before the year 1630 A.D. And "Christ" is not his name, it's just a title like "God" is.
Reply
#10
RE: I picked up this months Nat Geo last night...
Just because the term had not been anglicized does not mean the concept did not exist.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  As Predictable As Day Following Night Minimalist 13 695 November 15, 2018 at 8:33 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  So, late last night, Minimalist 2 1000 August 8, 2014 at 5:10 pm
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)