HELP, defending faith in school religious debate

abanoub2000

We are watching this movie in World Religions class, and there will be a debate on it tomorrow...... but i cant use the bible as a source!



Most people believe all this!!! I dont want to lose this debate..... how do i refute this without the bible?

TITL

What's the debate about? I have never heard of the lost tomb of Jesus and I don't have time to watch all that. Please educate me.

abanoub2000

apparently there was a tomb in jeruslaem where they found inscriptions of Jesus son of Joseph, and mary

and the video talks about him having brothers.... it is insane! but people believe it!

ilovesaintmark

What's the problem?  This has been hashed out many times.

Our Lord may have had half-brothers, so what.  Half-brothers are not the same as blood brothers, but they are still referred to as "brother".  Joseph, the elder, may have had other children from a previous marriage, but they were not fathered from the Virgin Mary.  In the Middle East, and in that time frame, close relations would call out to each other as brother, sister, father and mother.

In Genesis, Abraham speaks to Lot, his nephew with the word "brother".

Westerners are not going to get this nuance because it is not part of their culture or history.  It was common place in Biblical times.

minatasgeel

[quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=10004.msg122298#msg122298 date=1289866813]
apparently there was a tomb in jeruslaem where they found inscriptions of Jesus son of Joseph, and mary

and the video talks about him having brothers.... it is insane! but people believe it!

hmmmmm
you should search the statistics of how famous is the names MARY, Joseph and Jesus (yasho'--close to Joshua btw. in arabic yasho' and Yaso'....actualy in coptic they are really close to).....in the Jewish community...especially at those times.

ilovesaintmark

Is that like the name Mina is now?

minatasgeel

[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=10004.msg122302#msg122302 date=1289870424]
Is that like the name Mina is now?

i would expect it to be..........but also far more famous; Jews were in many other places outside Jerusalem by that time
read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Tomb_of_Jesus

John_S2000

If possible try not to discuss this without the Bible because it's like putting you in a confrontation almost helpless with your hands tied. In the Gospels there are eye witness accounts of the Lord's Glorious Resurrection with Him appearing to the Mary, the Apostles, the Disciples of Emmaeus and to more than 500 brothers at the same time, and later His Ascension, i.e. Our Lord left no bones it's impossible!. It's like wrongly claiming He was neither crucified nor resuscitated, you should use the Bible as your reference.

You can use some info present in these resources:

Non Biblical proof for Jesus Christ (4 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0

and
Discovery Channel, tomb of Jesus?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxtioL7fCIg

and
The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel (7 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/user/MauricioPerez1969#g/c/871F78EA970198F8

There was a lot of criticism on this documentary you'll be debating in class and many proved its errors (and many Christians used the Bible tho), search in YouTube because i cannot have these links right now. I think at least one of our COC Bishops commented on it too.

GBU

anba bola

I think minagir is right.

I just watched something that said the name on the coffin was jeshua (yeshua), meaning either Joshua or Jesus. This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziaoNA25niM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL should be adequate.

It also works off of many assumptions. Since "Jesha" and Mariamene were "unrelated," the filmmakers assumed they were married and had a son named Judah (from the ossuary "Judah, son of Jeshua"), though it can't be definitively proved. Also as for "Jesha" not being related to Mariamene, the DNA used is Mitrchondial DNA which can only be passed from mother to Child, so Jeshua could be Mariamene's Father and they'd be according to testing "not related" Furthermore, Bar-Ilan University Prof. Amos Kloner indicated that "Jesus son of Joseph" inscriptions had been found on several other ossuaries over the years.

Forgive any mistakes I make, as I could very well be wrong

Please pray for me,
Anba Bola

TITL

I was going to say what John_S2000 said. You can't really lead a good argument without using the Bible as your source. How will the other side defend their points saying 'Jesus had brothers' without the Bible?

John_S2000

abanoub2000,

You'll find important info within the YouTube links I've posted, plus the fact that the church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem is actually built at the site of the Holy Sepulcher, i.e. the site of the real Tomb of Jesus Christ and this was known since 20 centuries. You'll also find many of its inside and outside pictures if you Google it. Good luck!

GBU

epchois_nai_nan

The Lost Tomb of Jesus is widely discredited among historians of all faiths as a likely site of Jesus of Nazareth's tomb. The basic argument is: in this tomb are people called Mary, James, Jesus and the statistical probability of all those names occurring together is 1 in 600 (according to the frequency of those names in first century Jerusalem), therefore there is a 599 in 600 chance that this tomb belongs to the Jesus of the Gospel.

It doesn't take a genius to see the fault in that logic. Dr. Andrey Feuerverger says, "The role of statistics here is primarily to attempt to assess the odds of an equally (or more) 'compelling' cluster of names arising purely by chance under certain random sampling assumptions and under certain historical assumptions." Which is to say, the only thing the above statistic really means is that one in every six hundred first century Jewish tombs will have those names together. How many Jewish tombs do you reckon there are in all of the Middle East? Many, many more than 600 I'm sure! That means that there are probably many, many more tombs out there with exactly the same configuration of names.

That's why almost every historian and archaeologist who values his reputation has stated that the argument of the documentary is completely illogical - the wiki article posted by Minagir above has a whole section dedicated to the criticism of the documentary given by reputable archaeologists:

"I've known about these ossuaries for many years and so have many other archaeologists, and none of us thought it was much of a story, because these are rather common Jewish names from that period. It's a publicity stunt, and it will make these guys very rich, and it will upset millions of innocent people because they don't know enough to separate fact from fiction." William G. Dever

The American Archaeological Institute:

"The identification of the Talpiyot tomb as the tomb of Jesus and his family is based on a string of problematic and unsubstantiated claims [...] [It] contradicts the canonical Gospel accounts of the death and burial of Jesus and the earliest Christian traditions about Jesus. This claim is also inconsistent with all of the available information—historical and archaeological—about how Jews in the time of Jesus buried their dead, and specifically the evidence we have about poor, non-Judean families like that of Jesus. It is a sensationalistic claim without any scientific basis or support."

No need to refer to the Bible at all - publicity stunts like this fall over by themselves, and sensible scholars will quickly come out and condemn them.

[quote author=John_S2000 link=topic=10004.msg122304#msg122304 date=1289872720]
If possible try not to discuss this without the Bible because it's like putting you in a confrontation almost helpless with your hands tied. In the Gospels there are eye witness accounts of the Lord's Glorious Resurrection with Him appearing to the Mary, the Apostles, the Disciples of Emmaeus and to more than 500 brothers at the same time, and later His Ascension, i.e. Our Lord left no bones it's impossible!. It's like wrongly claiming He was neither crucified nor resuscitated, you should use the Bible as your reference.


I disagree - things like the Lost Tomb of Jesus can be discredited on their own logical faults, there's no need to refer to the Bible at all. We live in a skeptical world, and as such we must always use outside sources to test and examine the Bible's account - a book which testifies to its own authenticity is not enough in today's society (and there is a lot of wisdom in that), it must be backed up by external evidence. I think it's a very wise choice by your teacher to prevent students from referring to the Bible here, because it will force you to look at corroborating evidence, something we really don't do enough of ourselves. It should be a great learning experience :)

PFM

John_S2000

I think that the The American Archaeological Institute reference quoted by epchois_nai_nan is a solid answer too.

a book which testifies to its own authenticity is not enough in today's society (and there is a lot of wisdom in that)

Sorry, I do not see how much wisdom is found outside the authenticity of the Bible.

GBU

epchois_nai_nan

[quote author=John_S2000 link=topic=10004.msg122328#msg122328 date=1289925062]

a book which testifies to its own authenticity is not enough in today's society (and there is a lot of wisdom in that)

Sorry, I do not see how much wisdom is found outside the authenticity of the Bible.


I mean that there is wisdom in the idea of verifying the Bible's account with outside sources. That's something which Christian scholars do all the time.

colugi

itsnt that also like the people nowadays that call each other bro and sis. like it doesnt technically mean we are biologically related. Me and my friend at church call each other coptic SISTER. but she is in no way related to me other than the fact that all of us are related to Adam and Eve therefore technically making us all brothers and sisters in a way if u get me. soo yeh bye MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS OUT THERE. hahah cya

George_Mina_Awad

[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=10004.msg122299#msg122299 date=1289869041]
Our Lord may have had half-brothers, so what.  Half-brothers are not the same as blood brothers, but they are still referred to as "brother".  Joseph, the elder, may have had other children from a previous marriage, but they were not fathered from the Virgin Mary. 


The Coptic church isn't in agreement with this.

http://popekirillos.net/EN/books/Vstmary.pdf

the explanation starts on page 32 of the PDF (page 30 of the book itself).

ilovesaintmark

Actually, George, if you back track to p. 31 from the top, it identifies that there are Church Fathers who advocated the concept of half-brothers, and there is a listing of them, and then there is a constrast, as Fr. Tadros states: "Nevertheless, this idea is rejected by some theologians for the following reasons:" [then he lists the reasons].  I believe the concept related by Fr. Tadros, is that there are view points on both sides of the possibility.  Regardless, it does not change the matter that Our Lord [Jesus] is the Only-Begotten Son of St. Mary.

George_Mina_Awad

Ah. Should have read more thoroughly.

John_S2000

epchois_nai_nan,

OK I understand what you meant, but it works better while quoting from the Bible to confirm events to confused or weak believers. Many facts will remain material for debates as atheists and others will still work against these evidence. The problem lies more in the interpretation than the hard evidence.

abanoub2000,
Can you tell us what conclusion has your class debate reached?

I found another HC documentary with Cameron in the team: "The Exodus decoded". It seems more palatable plus a bit more scientific. Notice that it now uses many quotes from Scripture.

The Exodus Decoded
http://www.youtube.com/user/MrZunxo#g/c/0D57B6058623DCDC

These 2 documentaries are not purely science-based anyway, they are built on a lot of inferred deductions that depend on previous inferred deductions, speculations etc. However in the "Exodus decoded" I think some are real contributions to knowledge. Certainly not all these contributions have been academically proven yet: they are interesting but remain as hypotheses. I also noted the 'Lost tomb..' is against Christianity, while 'Exodus..' is more fair to Judaism. One bad thing: an inevitable ending sentence to appease the atheists.

GBU

abanoub2000

Thanks guys it went well, teacher agrees with my points!

but some people just believe everything they hear on TV

epchois_nai_nan

That's awesome Abanoub :D Congrats :)

[quote author=John_S2000 link=topic=10004.msg122379#msg122379 date=1290040522]
epchois_nai_nan,

OK I understand what you meant, but it works better while quoting from the Bible to confirm events to confused or weak believers. Many facts will remain material for debates as atheists and others will still work against these evidence. The problem lies more in the interpretation than the hard evidence.


But if there is no external evidence to confirm the Bible's authenticity, why believe in it? I'm asking sincerely, not sarcastically - what reason do you have to place your faith in the Bible if you're not looking at external evidence?

GBU