What makes this any different than the shroud of Turin or the now debunked James ossuary,,,or the alleged earliest known Bible fragments now being questioned for authenticity? Don't get me wrong, I love to hear of archeological discoveries but to make such a bold claim seems a bit much.
I don't dispute the historicity of the OT, though in my opinion not accurate in any means by today's standards. And I don't dispute that Jesus may have existed. (My concerns with the biblical texts has to do with claims of divinity, revelation, and inspiration. I also have difficulty with the Abrahamic concept of God.) But, is the "church" that desperate that they will leap at any little fragment, and not consider the ramifications once proven wrong or debunked as fake?
Overall it's still an intriguing find but questionable conclusion.
Jesus crucifixion nails 'found' - Telegraph
No comments:
Post a Comment