Spotting liars in online dating
" writes, "While most scholars agree that Jesus existed, no physical evidence from the first century has ever been conclusively tied with his life." evidence yet discovered.
As is well known to those who have scientifically investigated so many previous Christian claims, apologists constantly use this type of flawed logic.Supposedly also the box was heavily damaged specifically by a crack in the inscription.The ossuary's handlers have been surprisingly careless, especially considering how priceless would be this artifact, were it and/or its inscription genuine. ," Lorenzi uses another tactic that is convincing at first glance: She states that during these ossuaries were used in "the second of a two-stage burial process, when bones of the deceased were transferred from burial caves." By saying "In the first century," the writer is implying that such a use is unique to that century, thus giving the find even more credibility as deriving from the correct era.Although these enthusiastic newsbites make it seem otherwise, the James ossuary is not unusual, nor is it necessarily dated to the convenient year of 63 CE.
In giving his contrived date a professional flourish, Lemaire also claimed the box must date from the first century because it fits in with when "Jews" used ossuaries, between 20 BCE and 70 CE.
In actuality, the use of ossuaries even in the Palestine/Judea area dates back to at least the Second Temple Period and continued for several centuries into the Common Era.