Ancient Cave reveals Jesus Christ was worshipped in 33 A.D!!

[Psalm23]

This discovery has been hailed by Christians all across the Globe, but it has been halted by Islamic Leaders in Jordan.

This Cave proves Christ was worshipped approximately three decades before the first Gospel was written.. Pretty Neat, huh?

But wait!! There's more!! Atheists claim, Jesus of Nazereth was an invented character. but how is that totally true if he was being worshipped in 33 A.D, just as the N.T describes!? Hmm?
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International ... 242&page=1

Any atheists want to take a shot in the dark here?

[NaturaLCalamity]

Hi. My name is Psalm23, and I am not smarter than a fifth grader.

*Standing ovation given by HAF*

[Hitsumei]

I think you misunderstand the claim (despite the dubiousness of the evidence for the claims made in the article) I don't think that anyone who knows what they are talking about would say that Christianity does not predate the gospels. It's well known to. Dead sea scrolls reveal that several different "Christs" were worshiped in the Mediterranean for a few centuries before the new testament was written, or Jesus purported existed.

Was is disputed is the historicity of the Jesus Christ, or Yeshua ben Yosef specifically. The reason for this is the large time gap between the purported events, the nationality of the recorders of the events, the fact that no one who had ever met him personally has ever written anything about him, and he was completely ignored by contemporaneous historians in Palestine at the time, while -- if the gospels were true -- comparatively far less influential people, like John The Baptist warranted numerous historical mentions. As well as the geographical, historical, cultural, and legal errors made within the stories, and the degree to which the gospels vary from one and other.

[Psalm23]

The reason for this is the large time gap between the purported events, the nationality of the recorders of the events, the fact that no one who had ever met him personally has ever written anything about him, and he was completely ignored by contemporaneous historians in Palestine at the time.

That's because Jesus told his followers; "Go on your way and tell them about the works I have done." The people that followed Jesus Christ did not have a notepad and pencil handy. Do you know about "Jewish Oral Tradition?"

There has been no one that I can think of named, 'The Christ' that was worshipped in Jordan in the year Thirty-Three A.D, or even remotely close... other than Jesus of Nazareth.

If Jesus wasn't invented until the year, let's say 55 A.D, then how did he have worshippers hiding in caves in 33 A.D? This discovery lines up perfectly with the Dates of the Gospels.

Secondly, why would a Muslim (Dr. Al-Hassan) living in Jordan want to admit that Jesus Christ was worshipped?

Islam is very strict against anyone who claims "Jesus was worshipped as an Earthly man".

As a matter of fact..I believe they behead Christians in some parts of Jordan if they are caught worshipping the Christ!

[Shegevara]

Why shouldn't it be so?

There were many "Jesus like" people living that time. And Some were also put on the cross just like the jew you are preaching now. It's not unlikely then that some of the Martyrs who took the "ultimate sacrifice" on a cross inspired some of their Disciples who started worshiping them just after they died or even before. I don't know what's so strange about that.

N.T. was written LONG after Jesus died. No wonder they described the worshipping. No wonder that dates line up perfectly

[Hitsumei]

That's because Jesus told his followers; "Go on your way and tell them about the works I have done." The people that followed Jesus Christ did not have a notepad and pencil handy. Do you know about "Jewish Oral Tradition?"

There were about forty contemporaneous historians in Palestine at the time. Why was John the Baptist mentioned several times and Yeshua ben Yosef never mentioned once? Wasn't Yeshua ben Yosef far more influential? Have a far greater following, and stir up the religious leaders of the day far more? Why not even one mention?

The Jewish Oral tradition refers to before the Hebrew written language was popularized in the forth century B.C.E. and doesn't refer to after literate Jewish historians existed.  

There has been no one that I can think of named, 'The Christ' that was worshipped in Jordan in the year Thirty-Three A.D, or even remotely close... other than Jesus of Nazareth.

Then you need to read up on your Palestinian history, and archeology. This is just an argument from ignorance. I don't know the capital of Guatemala, so it must not have one.

If Jesus wasn't invented until the year, let's say 55 A.D, then how did he have worshippers hiding in caves in 33 A.D? This discovery lines up perfectly with the Dates of the Gospels.

The link that you gave for one, has no accepted evidence, or peer-reviewed work, and it just one guy making claims that he has yet to support -- but the problem is that you are laboring under the false apprehension that "Jesus Christ" was the only Christ to be worshiped in Palestine on or around the first century.

Secondly, why would a Muslim (Dr. Al-Hassan) living in Jordan want to admit that Jesus Christ was worshipped?

They already do. The Qur'an is largely based on the bible, and they need many of its events to check out as well -- but I don't even recall it saying that he is a Muslim, you seem to be just assuming that he must be because of his name. Though this also assumes that if it isn't true, he must be lying. He could be wrong, though even if he is right, and it was a Christian site, that doesn't mean that they were Christians that worshiped Jesus Christ, as opposed to say, Simon Christ.

Islam is very strict against anyone who claims "Jesus was worshipped as an Earthly man".

I think you are wantonly distorting the Islamic position that Jesus was not, nor claimed to be the son of god, and his being worshiped as such.

[curiosityandthecat]

Seriously, what's your beef with Muslims? Were you jilted at the altar by one, or what?

Incidentally, proving that people worshiped someone says nothing about that someone, just those people. And "atheists" don't claim that Jesus was an invented character; some atheists claim that. You really, really, really need to stop generalizing everything about every argument you make.

(See what I did there?)

[Sophus]

Well everyone I have an announcement to make... I'm a believer! I mean come on, people "worshipped" (nice spelling) a deity a really long time ago so it must be true... right? Oh wait... what's that? Hinduism is older by thousands of years? Okay, I guess I'm a Hindu now.

[PipeBox]

Hitsumei covered it expertly.  By the way, this story is from June 8th of last year, don't guess you have some follow up stories vindicating it, or far better, a reference to an anthropology or history journal?  Oh, but I will say, regardless of the truth of the article, I'd love to be there to examine those ruins myself.  I mean, just imagining, even as an atheist, discovering something in reference to early Christianity would be a thrill.  It's another piece of the story and filling it in is very satisfying.  In much the same vein, Psalm, have you seen the recent article about Eden?  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -Eden.html

It's the daily mail, so I trust it about as far as I can throw a lodestone, but there are pictures of people and rock and dirt, and it looks like a good time apart from the sweating and tiredness and all the other bits I imagine field work entails.  

Oh, and Psalm, this isn't encouragement.  You're way too willing to suck in articles and blow them back at us, which is ironic because even the writer of the article you linked seems very skeptical, being careful to use words like "claim."  The validity is questionable, but it would be a huge boon to Christianity if it were substantiated in the way you want it to be.  I don't think you're a bad person "at heart," as it were, but you need to gain a better grasp on reasoning and ethics.  You cannot justify the silencing of people just because you don't like what they have to say.  Likewise, if you find an article, you ought not accept it point blank as fact, especially not if it's coming out of a news outlet, especially not if the news outlet isn't certain of the claims.  There's almost always spin.

[Hitsumei]

I should mention, so that I'm not misunderstood, that I don't take the position that Yeshua ben Yosef, or Jesus, the Nazarene was not a historical figure. I'm not a historian, and the majority opinion of historians is that a man by that name probably lived, at sometime between 30-15 B.C.E. and 5-20 C.E. and was a rabbi, or a teacher of some sort. Though the majority reject almost 90% of the new testament accounts as early first century myth-making.

I accept the consensus of historians on this matter. Here is a Wikipedia page on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

The basic thing that the majority of relevant historians agree on is that Jesus was a Galilean Jew, with a small following, and was considered to be a teacher or healer of some kind. He was then probably at one point executed.

[joeactor]

I accept the consensus of historians on this matter. Here is a Wikipedia page on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Well, if we're gonna Wiki, you may want to read this one too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

I'm just not convinced he existed as a real person at all.
The comment about John the Baptist having more historical references outside of the bible is a telling one, IMHO.

So, step one: Did he really exist? (not much evidence outside of the believer's own texts)
If you manage to get past step one: Is he anything more than a man?

Just call me Doubting Thomas,
JoeActor

[Tanker]

Psalm23 you seem to make alot of assumptions and generalisations. I would like to acess your mistaken generalisation on Atheism and Atheists.

Please visit this site http://www.carm.org/. It's the Christian Apologists & Research Ministry web site. It gives a very good deffinion of who and what Atheists are and give alot of dos and don'ts for debting us. I'm sure you will find it a valuable resource and using it's sugestions should help your debating and credibilty on this forum.

[Hitsumei]

I accept the consensus of historians on this matter. Here is a Wikipedia page on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Well, if we're gonna Wiki, you may want to read this one too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

I'm just not convinced he existed as a real person at all.
The comment about John the Baptist having more historical references outside of the bible is a telling one, IMHO.

So, step one: Did he really exist? (not much evidence outside of the believer's own texts)
If you manage to get past step one: Is he anything more than a man?

Just call me Doubting Thomas,
JoeActor

History is not an exact science, and many of the figures we accept as real have no better historicity. I think that the lack of historical mentions contrasted with John the Baptist merely reveals that Yeshua ben Yosef could not have been nearly as influential as is claimed in the gospels. It is extremely unlikely that he had anymore than a very small following if he existed at all.

It is not unreasonable to take the position that he did not, but I do think that as long as I'm going to accept Socrates, Alexander the great, and other ancient historical figures, I might as well be consistent, and accept Jesus. It is either taking a position that many historians of ancient history would consider unreasonable, and require multiple first hand accounts, or first person writing, or accept third person accounts tentatively.

Although, if I were someone whose entire worldview hinged on Jesus Christ both being a historical figure, and the events told in the gospel as being true, I would require vastly more evidence than is available. I do think that it is unreasonable to lives one's life with the acceptance of the gospels as historical accounts as a premise.

[Lilbeth]

I have no reason to doubt that a man named Jesus was wandering around in the desert way back when......As far as anything else goes...nah....don't believe it....I witnessed the worship factor some place else recently....a group of people...one person worshipped this other person and gave over the top compliments and stuff....until it snowballed into something ridiculous with lots of people hypnotized into this thought pattern over time....I felt like saying....you ought to name this person St. ......It is another group mentality thing. I see how that could have happened with the Jesus thing, too.

[Whitney]

First, Jesus being a real person or not does not have much to do with whether he or his teachings were divine.  

Second, if you read about the discovery you will notice that some experts are cautioning people to not jump to conclusions until a thorough investigation can be done.  

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/06/1 ... hurch.html

Pictures:  http://www.monstersandcritics.com/scien ... rld?page=1