The Skeptics Guide #804 - Dec 5 2020

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

It was the one who worked stone since he. The bible says he was a craftsman. There you go because how else could you explain decent stonework. I can think of roman structure were known for stonework or any of that stuff. Wow yeah that's it there you go and then the whole thing. That's enough though as is lived here this. I know 'cause the bible told the rest. The rest honestly is just that over time that there were rumors that this was jesus house. You know that's it but this is this doesn't prove actually was jesus house. Yeah no kidding really what he says. But it's basically he does the but it's a plausible hypothesis and you can't prove it wasn't is not worth publishing like did not know there was good stonework for published it in a book apparently not necessarily period viewed but this is the culmination of fourteen years of study steve. Yeah there you go boy. Oh my gosh. And unfortunately nothing could be. They couldn't not only could they not carbon dated even date it based upon like pottery. 'cause pottery is a really good way to data find because you know you can create essentially a time line of pottery traditions. And then when you find a piece of plotter powder you then place it in time. Based upon the details of its craftsmanship and design at material used etc. But unfortunately the site was never excavated by archaeologists it basically was dug up by nuns. Who had no idea what they were doing. So they essentially destroyed all the evidence and took it out of out of context in which no longer institute. So we don't really. We don't know what this could be from five hundred eighty. We live in know that we can't really even say it was from the first century. Ad but why can't they use radio isotope sedate it. They just haven't done. i don't think they have. I don't have anything they could say this was this was from this house and this can be carbon dated so they do it with like you know some of that that their stonework gimmick material. So you're right about that. They used for the for the border and the stonework. Probably i don't know so we'll see how it may not it. May this popularization may garner actual attention from from archaeologists. Now that could do real excavation and maybe some dating and stuff but even if it was from a home from the first century a d and even if this was nazareth that doesn't mean it was jesus house and just the argument that well the stonework was really good is so thin. It's essentially useless and it's amazing. How every single piece of reporting takes that argument seriously without any pushback on my gosh sounds like shroud of turin. Field to hold told. What's it gonna take man. I mean you don't believe in anything at this point. North and then the dislike argument and the other thing is a lot of most of the reporting including from popular mechanics which terrible for them like. Start with the premise. That we know that jesus was a real guy. 'cause scholars basically say that he really existed. It's like well. No that's i would not say that that is not universal right. It is not universally accepted. And i don't really think that they have good because as i've said on the show their best argument was two things one was. Well why would they have. Jesus born in in bethlehem if they were gonna make up the story. Why wouldn't they just have somebody from bethlehem make this nazarene guy who had to whose mother had to travel to bethlehem. It's like okay so there were some crossing of the streams that doesn't mean that it was a real person from nazareth could have been just two stories got. There's yeah and which we know right. We have many many modern examples of how these stories get fabricated and alternate. How new details were in and our people. Keep reworking at reworking at and traditions meld and everything. So that's just naive. In my opinion incredibly naive to say that it must be real guy. Because why would they do that. And the other thing is the way that christ was crucified. This is why would they crucify their savior. That was like the most humiliating thing to have happen again. They probably didn't write the story out of whole cloth. They are weaving together different people. I'm sure there are a lot of i. We knew that there were tons of self proclaimed prophets walking around the middle east at that time and probably a lot of them got crucified. A lot of scholars that i've read you know. Make the argument that it's likely that the jesus persona is an amalgamation of a lot of territory telling notable some myths some truth all sort of mixed together and other things. I'm sure that there are real people in their absolutely but the thing is that everything significant abou this story of jesus in the new testament is almost certainly certainly all mythology because it falls in line with the mythology of that time and place pray it's been listing the pre existing mythology night in the little details but in the broad brush strokes. So you got these random details probably woven in from real. People are just other stories overlaid on top of a narrative structure that was pre existing. Again it would be like somebody in modern day claiming to be batman and decades crossed with. Was you know elon. Musk batman and then we get like real details about elon. Musk mixing with that man mythology his name thousand years from now you're people think that elon. Musk was batman's a real guy because there details from a real person's life mixed in with the mythology but the mythology is all dc comics. Basically what we're dealing with over here. So i'm just don't find any of that argument argument compelling it's just too too on the nose of the pre existing with So anyway they're starting with the premise. That it was a real person and of course it wasn't a real person then and the details in the new testament which again is not really a historical document if they are you know again just this reworking and reworking of mythology with with zero reliability when it comes to actual details then it becomes ridiculous to claim that you've found the house of somebody who may be mythological owns barn out back using a detail like the. The father was a craftsman. I mean come on. I mean that is like so razor thin it's incredible found noah's ark. There's some some boat and some shit on the must-have literally the troop k. I don't know if you're did you ever see that movie like finding noah's ark where they was think yeah going. Yeah so they found find. It knows they found a yeah right. Oh so. I even added something more. Like a wooden next to animal. Ship must be noah's ark. Most yeah was even but very disappointed in the reporting no real scholarship even let alone skepticism. But jay. you're going to tell us about another story that dates back about two thousand years and this one is real and how do with seeds to tell us about this because the seeds exist and people have held them. This isn't somebody's fantasy are they taught she's seeds they are jesus. How did you know. Let me ask you guys a question. So how long do you think seeds will last. If they're well preserved forever hundreds of years thousands at least two thousand years amber something. Well we have seed faults. Don't we it dry and cool. They could maybe last indefinitely. The will probably for the life of the half life of the dna. That's in them so we're probably talking about hundreds of thousands of years but not millions but even if there's dna was degraded i think something about the seed like the husk around it or something might still persist. We're talking about germany. Rien say that he just said how long can see last germany and german. Nba able to then plant it and grow something from the protons wouldn't decay for quite longtime. Well i think yes. Or if they're crow crow like the yes. Votes are usually freeze them or actually. It's enough to seed itself. It might be these little germination of seed but yeah or dried or something like that.

Coming up next