What is Digg?76 Comments
- drachemorder, on 11/19/2008, -1/+29Um, the fact that it's the tomb of a notable historical figure from 2,000 years ago? Just because you don't care about history or archaeology doesn't mean the rest of us don't either.
- Sornos, on 11/20/2008, -0/+18History is always important.
- MediaSight, on 11/19/2008, -0/+18For photos from the site and reconstruction drawings: ftp://e220995777E:Uq4C7a1u@tethys.cc.huji.ac.il
- georgemason01, on 11/20/2008, -1/+18He killed a lot of babies.
- these3remain, on 11/20/2008, -1/+16I may just have to dig you up on that for your honesty, not because I agree.
- scgirl212, on 11/20/2008, -1/+15I'm an archaeologist and one of the first things you ever learn is that until you have a name on an artifact that has context with the site..you can't ever be sure. The evidence doesn't really bring more support that its Herod's tomb, just that the person(s) who were buried there were important which doesn't mean much in archaeological context.
- LucasKane, on 11/20/2008, -1/+14In other news, I wish I was a archaeologist
- wondertwins, on 11/20/2008, -1/+13just go back to playing Guitar Hero
- ajkrik, on 11/20/2008, -0/+12B.C.E. - Please stop using that!
First of all, it is political correctness gone wild. I'm an atheist but can accept referencing years relative to "Christ's" (alleged) birth. I accepted the Thai year reference, Jews celebrate based on the Hebrew calendar. If you really want to change things, don't just paper over BC by calling it BCE. And exactly what is the "common era". How atrociously vague and undisciplined can you get? WTF does "before the common era" mean? I get the "before" part but the "common era"? Seriously, why don't we call it BCBM . . . before the common bowel movement. Is it coincidental that the "common era" begins the same year "christ was born?" Seriously . . . - Jedidadof2, on 11/20/2008, -1/+12hey hey hey there... now you're talking science, and we all know what a bunch of lies and propaganda that is.
Umm gravity anyone.. what a joke!
they can't even make up their minds on how many planets we have...
and all this crap about the Sun being the center of our galaxy.... as if - borez, on 11/20/2008, -5/+15Which Herod:
* Herod the Great
* Herod Archelaus
* Herod Antipas
* Herod Agrippa I
* Herod Philip I
* Herod Philip II
* Herod of Chalcis
* Herod Agrippa II
?
- Finalreminder, on 11/20/2008, -1/+11Archeological article.
No religion mentioned or implied.
Who mentions religion first? A rabid atheist.
Same *****, different day. - houndeyex, on 11/20/2008, -4/+13Are you some how relating this to abortion... cause you need to calm the ***** down if you are.
- timothycrash01, on 11/20/2008, -6/+14Right. And what about finding stuff that dates millions of years before Biblical times - stuff that contradicts Biblical time lines?
- benjhaisch, on 11/20/2008, -5/+13really? they keep finding more and more stuff that proves he actually did... I'd say that would help the cause right?
- inactive, on 11/20/2008, -4/+11I think it's more likely that historical and biblical convergence angers up his blood. Archaeological breakthroughs be damned in andergriffs little world - he gots him some Bill Maher to watch!
- inactive, on 11/20/2008, -4/+11Um... King Herod from the Bible?
- thetanman, on 11/20/2008, -0/+7I actually think this is a pretty cool story, and those pics off their ftp (see above link by MediaSight) are awesome. It amazes me stuff from that time period could be preserved and undiscovered near the heart of Jerusalem for so long.
- Fartbandit, on 11/20/2008, -2/+8This tomb merely shows some evidence of someone of importance who lived and died the time. I see no connection between than and the claim of jesus having existed...
- umanomano, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5Herod the Great, according to this article:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM ... - Barackalypse, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7Take religion out of the mix and King Herod becomes another in a long line of forgotten rulers with no relevance today.
- houndeyex, on 11/20/2008, -1/+6"Prof. Netzer is hopeful that with the further findings at Herodium, there will be increased visits to the site by Israelis and tourists, and that the overall area might be converted into a national park."
Tourism > History, apparently. - frieddonuts, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5You know, I'm an atheist, and I still find the Bible to be very interesting. The history of the Jews and early Christians is incredibly complex and it's sad that your dogma prevents you from seeing that.
Unless you're just apathetic. - xsmasher, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7No, he didn't - you'd think Josephus would have mentioned if he had.
It's a bit of tack-on mythology that Matthew used to make Jesus seem more Moses-like. If the author of Matthew were writing today, he'd have Jesus being born in a log cabin. - qwertyxuiop, on 11/20/2008, -0/+4ok... then does that mean that Gilgamesh and Ninsun were real since archeologists found the City of Uruk?
- Finalreminder, on 11/20/2008, -0/+4Under your username there's a time-since-post
- Isidore, on 11/20/2008, -0/+4Josephus records that Herod did good stuff and bad stuff including:
-had three of his sons executed for conspiracy
-executed his brother-in-law, Joseph
-at the urging of Joseph's widow, Salome, he murdered his own wife, Mariamme
-murdered the Jewish High Priest, Aristobolus III (his brother-in-law)
and just to show he wasn't just a Family Guy
-murdered forty five members of the Sanhedrin for their support of the Hasmoneans.
Josephus did not know or record all of Herod's deeds.
But he seems quite capable of committing the crime Matthew alleges,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great
BTW note the double standard used by some in assessing ancient history eg non-Christian sources for life of Jesus (ultra-skeptical) vs eg Herod (uncritically accepted). Josephus had not met either Herod or Jesus. Josephus mentions Jesus twice, one of the references has probably been doctored, the other has not been. - xsmasher, on 11/20/2008, -4/+8That's a large leap in logic. Anne Rice's books mention New Orleans, does that mean that Lestat is real? Oh, wait, better one! Mount Olympus is a real mountain. Does that bring your thoughts "onto" Zeus?
- inactive, on 11/20/2008, -3/+6Such as?
- aristotle0dude, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3Thank you for that. I dugg you up. You fit the true common definition of an atheist. Today it seem that there are a number of people going around calling themselves atheists but are really more anti-theists rather than atheist since they go beyond simply not believing in god or organized religion. The anti-theists have set up their own organized anti-religion hell bent on attacking anything religious rather than choosing to live in peaceful co-existence with other people. Dawkins is a perfect example of an anti-religion prophet/preacher. He simply cannot leave well enough alone and seeks to create conflict with religious people.
BTW. I'm a theist who believes in religious freedom. I believe that people can chose to not believe in god but that personal freedom does not extend to trying to interfere with the practices of others. - aristotle0dude, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3So we know that it is millions of years old because those dating methods have been verified by some known control not only for the correct scale but accuracy? Oh wait....
Blind faith is bad enough but blind faith in what some random dude in a lab coat says is even worse. - krnldmp, on 11/20/2008, -2/+5Now put on this white smock and kneel over there by that dirty thingie. We'll take care of the rest.
- aristotle0dude, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3Welcome to digg. It would not even be so bad if these rabid atheists said something original instead of the same tired ***** found on some anti-religion tract site. I get the feeling that some people are so afraid that they might actually learn something that might make them question their own lack of belief which is why they never bother doing their own research.
- Youhavemyaxe, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3The real King Herod http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb_9uH-ELJE
- Suricou, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3Ironically, the first religion-bashing event of the thread is in response to one of your own comments.
- CkMaverick, on 11/20/2008, -5/+8Take religion out of the mix and this is a wonderful archaeological discovery. Fascinating stuff really.
- Suricou, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4This works both ways though. The massacre was supposed to be a fairly large incident - if it has happened, surely someone as willing to record the dirt as Josephus would have noted it? Large-scale baby-killing is certinly a noteworthy event.
- lolwutpear, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8e/Indi ...
Hell yeah you do. - qwertyxuiop, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Why doe the term "the theory ladenness of observation" keep running through my head while i read this?
- hakluytbean, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2No religion implied? Come on. Besides, it's nonsensical that an atheist would 'mention religion first' in any context. I don't know whether to take you seriously or not.
- anaesthetica, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2IT BELONGS IN A *MUSEUM* !
- Roryking, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Level 37?
I bet he played Alliance, too. - Esstee, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Very poor comparison actually.
If you look at the biblical evidence, it would seem as though people went far out of there way to tie it in with real world evidence. So rather than a novel of Greek mythology, the bible was actually presented(written) as a series of records than that of story books.
I'm just saying...
If your going to criticize the bible then at least use fitting arguments. - estacado, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3I thought he was buried under a shopping complex in London.
- FolkTheory, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2i mean...he built it in order to get buried there...and he was still powerful and in charge of Judea when he died. so why wouldnt they bury him where he wished?
- gingle87, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3I was there a few months ago! I saw this archaelogical site. It was on the side of the hill that Herodium was built on, about halfway down. We could walk through many of the tunnels in that hill, but the ones that were being excavated were off limits to the public. Also, I should point out that at the time (and still now) it was not 100% positive that Herod was the one who was buried there. Like scgirl212 just posted, there hasn't been anything found at the site like a name on an artifact identifying it as being Herod specifically yet...not to say something like that won't be found. But still, it's looking more and more like a real possibility, especially considering that it was one of Herod's 3 main fortresses.
- edwinjose, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3I dislike your arrogance. You are so sure about what you know, unlike the scientists.
- qwertyxuiop, on 11/20/2008, -2/+4@ djgreedo
you can find "some historians" that will believe anything... that still doesn't mean anything.
Until there is some sort of DIRECT evidence linking this tomb to the biblical Herod it is wishful speculation. - djgreedo, on 11/20/2008, -2/+4Any illusionist can turn water into wine. Turn my right hand into Jessica Alba and I'll believe you're Jesus.
- hanger69er, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2Well actually, HE didn't kill them, but he DID order them killed.
-
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 