Knights Templar to use latest imaging in search for Grail

New Zealand Herald ^ | 01/06/03 | The Independent (?)

[brewcrew]

BZZZ!!! Sorry! Wrong answer. It's not there--or in any other vault or tomb.

But thanks for playing. We have some nice parting gifts for you. Why don't you tell him what he's won, Bob...

[Xenalyte]

Baigent's book also maintains that:

(1) Christ was never crucified for our sins.

(2) Christ never rose from the dead.

(3) That Christ got married and had children and that his direct-line descendants are alive today and live in southern France.

In short, Christians should steer clear of Baigent's ridiculous, ahistorical, made-up fantasyland of a book and stick to Scripture and reputable historians.

Actually, the book doesn't MAINTAIN anything at all. Baigent et al are very careful about hedging their bets; they explicitly state that their theory is utterly unprovable, and they claim to make no statements of fact. They present it as an intriguing what-if, and historical mysteries (whether fantastic like this, or provable like the fate of the Princes in the Tower) fascinate me.

BTW, your last statement reminds me of the rationale behind the Vatican's old Banned Books list. (I am aware that the list holds no force today.)

[Xenalyte]

The book does not teach anything. It posits a historical alternative.

Jeez, we're all prickly today, aren't we?

[Marianne]

BTTT

[Green Knight]

A) Historians will NEVER say that Christ died for our sins. Deal with it. It'll always be about what he did in life, and getting executed for it. It WON'T be about dying for sins.

B) Historians will NEVER say that Christ was resurrected.

Geeze, do you flip out whenever you see a Discovery Channel special that doesn't mention either of these? Get over it. As far as history is concerned, Christ was just a regular guy who died for political reasons. Unless there's indisputable proof that he was resurrected (And face it, there isn't. Why else is it called "Faith"?), then no serious historian will ever claim that he was resurrected.

[johnny7]

Yes... they existed and took the Holy Grail to France.

Whoever has it now is unknown.

Hitler coveted the spearhead of Longinus... it pierced the body of Jesus Christ.

When he invaded Austria, that was his first objective.

[wideawake]

There are only so many books in the world. If you're looking for knowledge it's best not to waste precious time reading the lunatic speculations of Spanish occultists treated with "respect" as a plausible "theory" on the basis of no evidence.

[My2Cents]

Petra, yes, but it was portrayed as something else in the third Indiana Jones film.

[sheltonmac]

"Total Crock Alert FYI, your god no more exists than does that of the islamocrazies. Get over it."

I pray that you won't have to be disproven the hard way.

[RightWhale]

It is a blasphemous teaching

Heretical, certainly. Not sure if it is blasphemy, is it contemptuous?

[lasereye]

Total Crock Alert FYI, your god no more exists than does that of the islamocrazies. Get over it.

How do you explain the record of Biblical prophecies, many of which were centuries before the events they foretold? There are of course atheists who assert that they were actually made after the events, but they have no factual basis for saying so. They just employ circular logic and assume it to be the case. Biblical prophecies have been extensively analyzed as have the age of surviving texts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

[Green Knight]

Serious? Or is that "series"? I can never remember how that's spelled... ;)

[RightWhale]

the spearhead of Longinus

That was the first relic recovered by the First Crusade in their first action in the ME. It also was lost shortly thereafter.

[My2Cents]

Unless there's indisputable proof that he was resurrected (And face it, there isn't...)

You hope.

[tracer]

Agreed. They are doctors, after all....

[tracer]

Baiget's first two contentions about Jesus are bad enough, but the one about France is really too much...

[FateAmenableToChange]

I do concede that much non-historical ink has been spilt on behalf of (or in repudiation of) the Templars, but they did in fact exist.

Sure, there was an organization that was founded during the first or second crusade, built its headquarters on the holy sepulcher in Jerusalem, got really rich doing that, became a power back in europe, got mostly killed in france by Phillip, and then disappeared. Everything after their disappearance as an order, though, is pure fantasy. Even though the freemasons claim to have derived from the KT, there's no historical proof of that either. I've read the books and they make great historical romance reading.

[SoDak]

Agreed. One can't hide (or shouldn't have to) to try to protect your faith. I like reading things that don't always follow what might be called accepted fact. Mysteries of the past are particularly fascinating.

[tracer]

"Yes... they existed and took the Holy Grail to France."

So, the French soldioers weren't lying after all when they told King Arthur and his knnnnniggggggohts that "We've already got one".....

[Xenalyte]

There are only so many books in the world. If you're looking for knowledge it's best not to waste precious time reading the lunatic speculations of Spanish occultists treated with "respect" as a plausible "theory" on the basis of no evidence.

I'm not always looking for knowledge. Sometimes a good read is just a good read, and a cigar is just a smoke.

For my edification, how are Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln (a Frenchman, an Englishman and an American) Spanish occultists?