Jesus’ burial site found - film claims

[JohnnyK]

Here’s a link to their “contact us” form. Let them know how you feel.

extweb.discovery.com/viewerrelations

Personally I hope they end up not airing this blatant attack on Christianity.

 

[daeve]

I find the responses here very interesting. No one has suggested that, even if the archeological evidence were considered valid, that Catholics would still regard the doctrine of the Resurection as true. After all, what is the value of faith if you don’t accept the doctrines of faith on face value notwithstanding “evidence”?

So my question to you is: does your faith matter or can it be compromised even with valid and substantiated scientific evidence? Faith is belief not based on proof. So where goes your faith?

With the Catholic Church. If the Church says it’s true, I’ll accept it. If the Church says no way…no way.

 

[Larry1700]

Here’s a link to their “contact us” form. Let them know how you feel.

extweb.discovery.com/viewerrelations

Personally I hope they end up not airing this blatant attack on Christianity.

Thanks for providing a practical way to address this issue! Here is what I wrote to them:

*I am very disappointed that you have decided to air a show based on a movie that will be attempting to disprove the very foundation of Christianity – the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Obviously, I have not yet seen the show. I hope it provides sufficient proof that the so-called “evidence” is invalid, and I hope that your show will bring to light that Jacobovici was the one who brought us the forged James ossuary.

While I fail to understand why the Discovery Channel deliberately chooses to provide an additional voice for charlatans such as Jacobovici, I hope you will make it crystal clear to the viewers that it is a hoax.

I don’t know how many of the the Discovery Channel’s people involved with this program are Christian, but I want to remind you that you are jeopardizing those souls as well as those of your viewers if your show deliberately tries to sensationalize inconclusive or intentionally false “evidence” and leads many away from Christ.*

When I was writing it, I had a thought…
If they did this about Muhammed, the threats would be more (shall we say) “substantial.”

 

[JohnnyK]

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[mchale]

What you say about faith and contradiction is true. But consider the Eucharist. Catholics believe it is, in fact, the body and blood of Christ - not a substitute, not a representation, but the real thing. But there is no scientific proof. A scientist can’t analyse the DNA. To believe this requires absolute faith - faith without proof - even though, as someone said, there can be no contradiction to the truth.

There is a difference between the way that Christ is present in the Eucharist and his resurrection. In the Eucharist, Christ always was present under the appearance of bread and wine. The theology of this was well developed long before science came along. Thus we know that while the Eucharist is of the substance of Jesus, it retains the accidents of the bread and wine.

The resurrection on the other hand, as presented in the Bible is quite clear that Jesus’s body was not present in the tomb. That when Jesus raised from the Dead, not only his substance but his accidents were also removed from the tomb. Further the Bible is also quite clear that while the accidents of his fallen body were no longer in the tomb, Jesus now had a transfigured body. Thus the finding of Jesus’s body would be a severe blow to the veracity of the Gospel… if it were real.

So back to my question: how does faith fit into the mix of scientific evidence? Disregarding Cameron who is probably a showman at heart, there could arise artifacts that pose strong suggestions which contradict Church teaching.
Where would you stand in the end?

As I said in another thread, I will deal with any such evidence when and if it arises. I am not going to start worrying about a bunch of hypotheticals that I believe are likely to never happen. The long and the short of it is that Christian Faith is based on a bodily resurrection of Jesus. I don’t hold to the interpretation of Spong and others that it was a useful myth. If the bodily ressurrection could be shown to not have happened (which I don’t believe is possible) then I don’t think I could remain a Christian in the sense of believing the Nicean Creed. I would still be a Theist because I have other reasons for believing in God, but I would have a hard time believing that Christ was God.

–
Bill

 

[Faith1960]

I think you already know what I’m talking about, but just to make it clear… The Church of the Holy Sepulcher. The 3 date temporary resting place of Jesus Christ right on the old Golgotha site in Jerusalem .

No, I had no idea what you were talking about. I never participated or even read that discussion.

 

[T1Catholic]

Actually, how do you know that some of us aren’t qualified?

Because nobody has spoken up and said so. Don’t you think if there was somebody with professional qualifications they would speak up?

Again, how do you know. Some of us on CA actually have an indepth interest in science and even may do some amateur science of our own or work closely with scientists. For all I know, some of the apologists here might actually be scientists!

 

[Faith1960]

I’ll say this loud and clear: the way it is presented, with all the pageantry of a snake oil salesman, should already make one suspect. I don’t think there’s any more convincing needed that is it fake. True archeological findings are rather staid, quiet affairs. No bombast, no pageantry. It is very academic. Once it goes into a circus, then you would have to think twice, as clearly there’s a hard sell thrown into it, as if such people are trying to convince its viewers it is true. And with such a circus going on…as well, like I pointed out, first century Christians don’t have the cross as a symbol of faith; that came much later. That should’ve given it all away, but those who don’t know their history would fall for such a thing.

Which ossuary had the cross? I only see a hexagon with a kind of starburst carving in the middle.

 

[T1Catholic]

Yes, but so what. This is the whole problem with showmanship versus real science. DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT JESUS’ BLOOD TYPE, OR DNA STRAND WAS? NO…SO HOW CAN WE SAY ANY DNA WE FIND ‘IS’ THAT OF JESUS WHEN WE DON’T KNOW WHAT IT WAS IN THE FIRST PLACE. Even if it did match the Shroud, what would that prove, other than it matches the Shroud, period. .

Well I should have made clear that I was being tongue-in-cheek with the DNA comparisson. But my goodness if the DNA on the Shroud of Turin did indeed match the DNA in the osuary, it would certainly be a whopping big deal! Because if we say the osuary is not Jesus (and I don’t believe it is Jesus Christ for the record), then we would have to extend that conclusion to the Shoud which millions of Catholics revere (at least it’s open to our own belief and not mandated by the Church).

 

[mchale]

Because nobody has spoken up and said so. Don’t you think if there was somebody with professional qualifications they would speak up?

 

[Redbandito]

Does anyone have any good links to a solid article in response to James Cameron’s documentary on “Jesus’ tomb?” I have been trying to google something, but can’t find any responses to these claims as of yet. I am aware that the man that found this tomb has called the whole documentary ridiculous. Yet, I would like to see a good article on the subject. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Lazerlike42]

Does anyone have any good links to a solid article in response to James Cameron’s documentary on “Jesus’ tomb?” I have been trying to google something, but can’t find any responses to these claims as of yet. I am aware that the man that found this tomb has called the whole documentary ridiculous. Yet, I would like to see a good article on the subject. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

Give it a few days until it comes out and people get to see what it actually says. Two weeks from now, you’ll find more responses than you know what to do with.

 

[sandusky]

Does anyone have any good links to a solid article in response to James Cameron’s documentary on “Jesus’ tomb?” I have been trying to google something, but can’t find any responses to these claims as of yet. I am aware that the man that found this tomb has called the whole documentary ridiculous. Yet, I would like to see a good article on the subject. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

I know most Catholics here don’t like everything about James White; however, he has been blogging on it at the provided link, and he has done a Dividing Line show (which I think can be downloaded), concerning what was said on the NBC morning show on Monday, and the Larry King Live show which I think was on Monday as well.

The book came out yesterday (at $27 a pop), according to what I’ve heard.

It’s just more archaeological, book-writing, movie-making, money-making, bogus sensationalism close-to-resurrection-remembrance/celebration shenanigans.

 

[Redbandito]

Thanks Lazer. You are, of course, correct. I will be patient. Also, thanks Sandusky. I don’t dislike James White. I don’t particularly care for a lot of his debating tactics. However, I won’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Thanks for the resources. I’ll check them out. God bless you both. And remember, as much as we discuss disagreements with each other, we must be united against those who would have both of us become irrelevant.

Josh

 

[tm30]

Right out of the gate, the fact that Peter led the Church belies any statements against the Resurrection. If Peter repudiated His faith while Jesus was still alive, why would he embrace it later if it turned out Jesus was a con-artist? If anything, he would have felt vindicated and either re-dedicated himself as a a Jew or gone back to the fishing boats. There would be ZERO incentive for him to become a marked man for a lie.

The last thing we know about Peter before the Crucifixion is that when the chips were down, he didn’t have the courage to stand for Christ. If nothing else happened but Jesus being laid in a tomb - if there were no Resurrection - there was absolutely no reason for Peter to lead the Church (who would’ve given him the charge of feeding “My lambs”?) and every reason to distance himself even further from Christianity.

 

[LSK]

Does anyone have any good links to a solid article in response to James Cameron’s documentary on “Jesus’ tomb?” I have been trying to google something, but can’t find any responses to these claims as of yet. I am aware that the man that found this tomb has called the whole documentary ridiculous. Yet, I would like to see a good article on the subject. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

I have only seen the general press release which clearly stated that every scholar - secular or otherwise - refutes his theories and laughs aloud at his assertions.

I’m guessing you could find that through a google search of AP news releases?

 

[sandusky]

Here’s a link to White’s Dividing Line show from Tuesday, 2/27/07, for anyone who is interested; it’s about an hour in length, and it is devoted completely to this topic :tiphat:

 

[Carrie_Andrews]

I find the responses here very interesting. No one has suggested that, even if the archeological evidence were considered valid, that Catholics would still regard the doctrine of the Resurection as true. After all, what is the value of faith if you don’t accept the doctrines of faith on face value notwithstanding “evidence”?

So my question to you is: does your faith matter or can it be compromised even with valid and substantiated scientific evidence? Faith is belief not based on proof. So where goes your faith?

I believe it was answered:

Originally Posted by yugnok forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cak/viewpost.gif
Oh no!

I guess I’ll have to go find another religion. It was fun while it lasted.

Perhaps the sarcastic remark threw you? This is about as real as the one last year with the brother of Jesus inscribed on it. Why all the hubbub, if you’re upset about it let Discovery channel know, I did, not because I think it has merit, but because I think it lacks respect.

 

[marvin]

I just had a crazy idea.

First let me say that I don’t think there’s anything substantial in this latest Discovery channel money making scheme. On traditon alone it doesn’t hold water.

But just for fun…

If (and its still an if at this point) the ossuaries actually say “Jesus son of Joseph”…etc. Could it be the tomb of a cult of Jesus worshippers. You know maybe these people took these names ( again assuming that Mary Magdalene’s ossuary actually reads “Mary the Master” not “Mary Martha”)
Jesus son of Joseph, Mary, Matthew (that would help explain who Matthew is anyway.) etc. in the same way that the Amish have biblical names.

                                      or

Maybe this was the tomb of some delusional guy who called himself Jesus…

Anyway, I don’t have the time or inclination to go off on this tangent, but if anyone finds it interesting, please feel free to run with it.

Alleluia, He is risen.

-Marvin

 

[CatholicSphere]

I’ve rounded up several Catholic blog entries out there that either explain aspects of the historical and Scriptural problems or link to good resources.

A few of the better commentaries I’ve seen on them are:

‘Da Vinci Code’ Archeology Gone to Seed – Philip Blosser (Professor of Philosophy at Lenoir-Rhyne College) – Musings of a Pertinacious Papist

THE JESUS TOMB? ‘TITANIC’ TALPIOT TOMB THEORY SUNK FROM THE START - Ben Witherington (Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary) (non-Catholic)

Hollywood Hype: The Oscars and Jesus’ Family Tomb, What Do They Share? - Darrell Bock (Research Professor of New Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary) (non-Catholic)

I’m also looking forward to Jimmy Akin’s info once he’s ready to post it.