Posted: Mar 08, 2015 12:40 pm
by MS2
Rumraket wrote:
Free wrote:Massive assumption. Appears to be an attempt at sensationalism. From a strictly historical perspective, although Jesus may have come from Nazareth, there is no evidence he existed there as a child. There is nothing known about Jesus before he began his purported ministry.

But I cannot find much info on this archaeologist in an effort to determine if he has some kind of Christian bias.

He's found a house dating to the period and finds it appropriate to not only speculate whether Jesus lived in it, but to speak about it publicly. He's propagandizing for his religious beliefs. That is christian bias.

I don't think that's entirely fair. It was found a very long time ago and was venerated as Jesus's house for centuries. It was then 'lost' and then found again in the 19th century, when there was further speculation as to it being Jesus's house. In those circumstances it is reasonable to carry out a proper archaeological investigation and also to discuss the question whether it could have been J's house in the paper writing up his findings.