My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« GOVERNMENT - Anderton dismisses "utter nonsense" | Main | Z&W The Award For Best Work Of Fiction goes to... »



Jesus? James?

All the same to me "I'll grind his bones to make my bread".


Here's a URL to an alternative Christian Website with info.

The big Lie Unfolds:


Funny, but just as matchbox20's "crutch" came up on the stereo, I chanced upon this article:


Various comments on the subject on this blogsite:


I would welcome confirmation of the discovery of the remains of Jesus, legendary figure of the New Testament.

It would make no difference to my own opinions of Jesus, but it could have a profound impact on the Christian fundamentalists!


Sorry to tell you Peter, but that confirmation will never come.

You see Christ rose from the dead.

There are no bones to find.


This finding may relate quite well to the Bible account.

Remember that it says that Jesus was buried in the tomb of a wealthy person. It could be that as other family members died, they were able to be interred in the same space.

More credible than Intelligent Design, Astrology, Tarot Cards, Immaculate Conception, Resurrection, Ascension, and other supernatural stuff.

John Boy

Irrespective of the merits of the opinions I did note how respectful the post review debate was. Its a good example of how things should be done.


"It would make no difference to my own opinions of Jesus, but it could have a profound impact on the Christian fundamentalists!"

Claims like the one being made are not news, you're only fooling yourself if you think one last documentary is going to so much as lift an eyelid. Not because christians are not listening, but because claims like this have been pushed at the church since it's conception.

We're not athiests.


I still think that finding the remains of Jesus Christ would clear up doubts that exist in some "believers'" minds.

It may improve understanding of the Bible - as the book of poetry, legend and metaphor that it already is.

ian're like a broken record...if there were any "remains" of Christ to be found, the Romans and Jews would have found them so as to put an end to the religion they hated.

More to the point, he'd be the first person in recorded history to have survived a Roman crucifixion, something the Romans were actually very good at carrying out.

A near-dead, bedraggled, bloodspattered, hobbling Christ with half his guts hanging out from a spear wound in his side, who falls through the door at the apostles' feet with a not-very-triumphant sounding "See, I've beaten the Grim Reaper, I'm the King of the Universe!", is hardly likely to have been the figure the apostles and 500 others saw resurrected, and later ascending in glory.

No matter how much noise you make to kid yourself Peter, you'll have to deal with the one you rejected one day, and for all your bluster about balanced reporting, fair hearings, testing the evidence and the like, when he asks you if you gave him a fair hearing, what will you say?


I just don't follow your line there Ian. I certainly made no claim whatsoever that the crucifixion had been survived - why would I?

I thought my Sunday School class was quite clear! The body of Christ was buried in tomb of a wealthy man. You are not going to change that one on me!

As I have already pointed out, we can ignore the fantasy parts of the story such as resurrection, doubting Thomas, ascension, holy spirit and any other wishful thinking. We should be paring the tale back to the flow that includes the basic facts.

John Boy

Yes Peter, the basic facts are the key, but all the possible facts, not just the non-threatening ones you are comfortable with.


DNA testing should be quite conclusive. After all the son of God should have unique features to be a perfect human. Oh Whoops, I'm on the wrong team now, aren't I!

John Boy

I'm not sure DNA would show anything special but who knows. Looking doesn't bother me although I suspect that what made him special may not be visible as a physical feature. So, probably nothing proved either way but time will tell.

Who cares what team you're on? Its not my business and blogging would be darn boring if we all agreed about everything.


Thank you John. I do feel that this discovery is more likely to be authentic than the Turin shroud!

Now, how many years did the shroud serve as an icon?

The comments to this entry are closed.