Jesus’ burial site found - film claims

  • Thread starter Thread starter DVIN_CKS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just another interesting tidbit…the archaeologist (a real one, which Simcha Jacobovici is not in spite of the name of his TV show) who actually discovered the site said that the name that they are interpreting as Yeshua is actually Hanun, another common name of the time. It is just another fabrication.
 
Okay, so Christianity is all a big lie. The Apostles and all the immediate followers of Jesus just made up the whole resurrection and virgin birth thing, and secretly buried Jesus in a very nice tomb with all of His relatives, and then told the rest of the world a nice fairy tale about Him. Okie-dokie. But, here’s the thing I don’t understand: If this is Jesus’ secret burial site, why in the world would anyone bother to write “Jesus son of Joseph” on the ossuary?? :rolleyes: - and why have a prominent family tomb at all? Indeed, it’s not like this family tomb was hidden in some deep crypt beneath a Christian church or whatever. In ancient times, it was out in the open for all to see. There also would have been a recorded deed and ownership rights to this piece of property (see Matt 27:59-60, Acts 4:36-37), and all that would have been registered publicly in Jerusalem (and most likely in archives controlled by the chief priests, the enemies of the Christian sect).

So, if the Apostles launched a big cover-up, this would certainly not be a very effective way to do it. Indeed, we know for a fact that both the Church’s Jewish enemies and the various Jewish-Christian sects (even those which did not recognize Jesus’ Divinity or His virgin birth, e.g. the Ebionites) fully recognized either the reality of the Resurrection or the fact that Jesus’ body was missing, that is, stolen and unrecoverable. If a tomb (and especially a rich and prominent one like this) were available, the contemporary Jews and other residents of Palestine would never have granted the premise for the Resurrection (or a stolen and unrecoverable body). Indeed, if there was a tomb that was known to be owned by Jesus’ family, this is the first place that the Jewish (and Roman) authorities would have looked for the stolen Body; and that would have put an end to the Nazarene (Christian) “heresy” right away. No need to get Saul of Tarsus to go around arresting and stoning the disciples, just take them to the tomb and show them the inscription!! But, the fact that there was not even the slightest rumor of such a thing (especially in anti-Christian Jewish circles) screams the fact that Cameron’s Discovery Channel special is all a waste of our time. Either Jesus of Nazareth rose from the dead, or His Body was buried secretly in an umarked grave so that the “lie” of His Resurrection (and Heavenly Messiahship) could be popularized. There is no in-between possibility that makes any sense, and anyone with half a brain must admit that.

But, let’s really play devil’s advocate and entertain the anti-Christian argument. Let’s say that the Apostles knew that Jesus was not God, etc. Let’s say that they were all very “sophisticated” and “mature” and that they just appreciated the “deep meaning” of Jesus’ teachings and, for some reason, wanted to promote Him as the promised Messiah because of that. So, while they knew that He was still dead, they faked the resurrection and told everyone, that is, their “uninitiated” followers, that He was alive and that they had seen Him and that these poor innocents should now also hope to cheat death and live forever by trusting in His Name. Again, this was all just for the “novices”, for the stupid common people, whereas the Apostles (who were behind the whole thing) knew better, but were too “sophisticated” to need such immature incentives. Rather, they just appreciated Jesus’ “deep” teachings and knew that eternal life was all just a metaphor; and these “mature” religious reformers (the Apostles) did not fear death, but were above such “petty concerns” and motivated solely by the intellectual brilliance of their dead master (which is pretty impressive, considering that they were supposedly just simple Jewish fisherman - or so we have been told; maybe that’s a “lie” too.

continued. . .
 
But, even IF we were to grant all of this, the problem still remains: Why would they inscribe “Jesus son of Joseph” on their dead master’s ossuary??? Why do it? If the “reality” of His dead body was never to be known, then it would be stupid to inscribe the ossuary for the masses to see (and possibly uncover). And, if it was just for them, just for “the initiated” who might take it upon themselves to venerate their poor master’s dead body (or possibly to show it to future “mature Christians” who would be initiated into their “inner circle” and told the “full truth”), then why would it just read “Jesus the son of Joseph”? Why not read: “Jesus the Messiah” or “Jesus the Lamb of God” or “Jesus the King of Israel,” or even “Jesus son of Joseph, of the House of King David”, or some other designation that would have religious significance for this supposed inner circle of disciples??? Indeed, the reason that one writes on a tomb is to commemorate this dead specific audience (e.g. “beloved husband,” “beloved mother,” “King of Egypt,” “President of the United States,” etc.). But, by merely writing “Jesus son of Joseph,” these disciples would basically be ignoring or denying Jesus’ Messiahship all together and, essentially, be saying that there is nothing extraordinary about Him. Again, this makes no sense in the context of the “cover-up,” the purpose of which would be to promote Jesus as some kind of true Messiah, albeit not one that rose physically from the dead.

Perhaps Cameron would like a nice bridge in Brooklyn? :rolleyes:
 
Milliardo said:
What gave this away as a fraud is the part that says they found coffins with cross marks on them-the cross as a symbol of Christianity was not used by first century Christians; that came much later. Those who know their history will not fall for this one.
Click to expand...
CItation? I must have missed that one.
 
Summing up what I’ve personally seen so far.
  • The original team to find the site, Israeli archaeologists, didn’t connect the tomb with Christ.
  • The tomb belonged to a middle class family - Jesus’ family was poor.
  • It’s apparently in the wrong area for a family tomb - Jesus’ family wasn’t from Jerusalem.
  • The ‘DNA evidence’ only shows that the Jesus and Miriam of the crypt were apparently not related by one line. What I’m particularly noticing is omitted: Not showing any relation between any of the other people in the tomb.
  • Debate over what names are on what tombs. ‘Jesus’ may not be Jesus, what’s supposedly Mary Magdalene may not be Mary. ‘It took 20+ years to translate the names on the tombs’ isn’t the most inspiring sign for authenticity.
  • The ‘odds of these names being together like this’ is fairly meaningless.
  • The people involved aren’t real archaeologists. One’s a film maker, the other’s a freelancer with a TV show who was also involved with the James ossuary, which has little credit to it’s name.
  • Additional problem with the James ossuary - if it came from that tomb, it couldn’t have been earlier than 1980. But supposedly that ossuary may have been around since the 1970s, with photographic evidence of same.
  • The experts they consulted (this is at a glance on their information page) who ‘verified the authenticity’ verified things like, ‘Yep, limestone. That’s usually what they used in these crypts’ and ‘Around 2000 years old? That’s supposed to roughly be the date of Christ’s birth.’
  • Atheists and the generally Christian-hostile are all torn up on whether to insist that this proves Christ was real but was a fraud, or to stick with the line that Christ never existed to begin with. (There’s a few who believe Christ was a real person, but simply not God. I just happen to come across vanishingly few types like these in discussion.)
But what can we do but wait and see? I find it hard to believe that the archaeologists and scholars are going to turn around and say, ‘You know, we heard about this decades ago and discounted it, but this James Cameron fellow may be on to something!’ My instinct is it will turn up similar to the Caesar’s Messiah guy - a vague, short footnote on Wikipedia, prefaced by “While the vast majority of archaeologists and biblical scholars discount such claims as baseless, James Cameron asserted in his film that…”
 
2shelbys said:
Jacobovici is somehow allowed to pass himself off as an archaeologist even though his degrees are in Philosophy and Political Science. Does Cameron now do so little research that he is anaware of Jacobovici’s soiled reputation or does he just no longer care about his own reputation?
Click to expand...
As much as I think this is complete horse pocky, I have to stick up for Jacobovici in one regard. He never claims to be an archeologist - rather, he stated quite vehemently on This Morning’s Today Show that he is a journalist, not an archeologist.

Jess
 
mschrank said:
Yes, like that wonderful Paradise of rationality called the USSR, like Pol Pot, like the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.

Like that?

You’d figure after the horrors inflicted on the world by enlightenment atheism in the 20th century, they’d give up!.. well, most of them did, and became pomos, but some diehards insist on keeping that dead horse on life support!
Click to expand...
As Glenn Reynolds would say; “OUCH”.
 
Google “James Cameron” with the word Freemason and you will get a whole bunch of hits.

Many websites out there identify him as a 33rd degree mason, scottish rite. The odds are that he is a Freemason. Did some readin on him years ago on some very reputable sites. His cover was blown years ago.

Not that I want you readers to waste a lot of time reading about him; rather pray for him.
 
Dominic_Brother said:
Google “James Cameron” with the word Freemason and you will get a whole bunch of hits.

Many websites out there identify him as a 33rd degree mason, scottish rite. The odds are that he is a Freemason. Did some readin on him years ago on some very reputable sites. His cover was blown years ago.

Not that I want you readers to waste a lot of time reading about him; rather pray for him.
Click to expand...
Coupled with the fact that this is all happening during Lent…The heck!
 
As other people have noticed - always right around Easter, this stuff starts to pop up.
 
JessicaCeleste said:
As much as I think this is complete horse pocky, I have to stick up for Jacobovici in one regard. He never claims to be an archeologist - rather, he stated quite vehemently on This Morning’s Today Show that he is a journalist, not an archeologist.

Jess
Click to expand...
Well, that is good, maybe it is because of all of the bad press he is getting again. But why did he sign on to host a show called “The Naked Archeaologist”? Why isn’t it “The Naked Journalist” or “The Naked Political Scientist” or “The Naked Philosopher” or “The Naked Non-Archaeologist”?
 
Nicene said:
Mark, read the post before yours. :yup:

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Click to expand...
Your name tipped me off and I had time to delete the post, but I thought it kinda fit. I really appreciate a good sense of humor, I just don’t have one.
 
I imagine if we did our research correctly that we would find several hoax of the time of the death and resurection of Jesus.
 
Here’s where I think there’s been some major manipulation—which goes without saying— but, we’re all caught up in the major “discovery” of Jesus’ tomb. The BIG fallacy of this argument is that this tomb wasn’t always HIDDEN. In fact, I don’t know (I truly don’t) if there’s evidence that this tomb was EVER HIDDEN (as opposed to being a slowly forgotten tomb, like many graves of 2000 years ago, with the passage of time.

Now, given what is indiputable about
Christianity is that it was a HUGE problem for the social leaders (both the Romans and the Jews). How could Jesus really be buried anywhere in such a tomb and NOT have it really exploited by the “Leaders” of that day - or of that 300 or so years of CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION? If it wasn’t important to the people at the time (especially those who were losing all power and control as a result of Christianity) why should we even pay heed to it now???
 
Daniel_Marsh said:
ten years ago the BBC tried to do a documentary on this, and archeologists blew it out of the water. The word that they translate Jesus may not even be the word for Jesus. Besides, the names used in the gospels like Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Simmon, and so on are very common. What is really funny is their claim that they compared DNA, when in fact there was no bones in the box that they claimmed belonged to Jesus.
Click to expand...
I’ve been watching CNN this evening and there’s been much debate about this subject, as you can imagine. The commonality of the names was mentioned quite a bit. The filmmakers agreed that those names were common back then, what’s interesting is confirmation from statisticians that the likelihood that that particular grouping of names would be found together is virtually impossible.
Someone else, a Dr. Tabor, mentioned that this tomb is reported to contain Jesus’ siblings, siblings he said scholars accept as being fact.
 
Let’s say that the Apostles knew that Jesus was not God, etc. Let’s say that they were all very “sophisticated” and “mature” and that they just appreciated the “deep meaning” of Jesus’ teachings and, for some reason, wanted to promote Him as the promised Messiah because of that. So, while they knew that He was still dead, they faked the resurrection and told everyone, that is, their “uninitiated” followers, that He was alive and that they had seen Him and that these poor innocents should now also hope to cheat death and live forever by trusting in His Name.
Click to expand...
Loved this “devil’s advocate” argument. May I also add this question to your list: Wouldn’t it have been easier for the Apostles to convince the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah WITHOUT a resurrection? It’s my understanding that the Jews were not expecting the Son of God, but rather a human man, like David. So if Christ did actually die and was buried, as a human being, wouldn’t the Apostles have had an easier time convincing folks?
 
blessedtoo said:
Loved this “devil’s advocate” argument. May I also add this question to your list: Wouldn’t it have been easier for the Apostles to convince the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah WITHOUT a resurrection? It’s my understanding that the Jews were not expecting the Son of God, but rather a human man, like David. So if Christ did actually die and was buried, as a human being, wouldn’t the Apostles have had an easier time convincing folks?
Click to expand...
I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me why the Apostles would invent a religion that would get them killed to a man! (except John) Seems to me, it is not even within the realm of possibility even if they all recanted when faced with death.

But that not one Apostle recants to save his life and goes to his death for a fantasy that he invented? Silliness

My dad tried that argument today. I felt bad for him since he didn’t have an answer (one of those “skeptics” that needs it all to not be true)
 
T1Catholic said:
I enjoyed your post Bill because I agree we need to take faith out of this story and instead debunk it on the same scientific grounds that it bases its claims on. I don’t believe that the outcome of any further analysis of the science will prove to disprove Christianity. However, I don’t like it when we Christians automatically disregard something that says it has archeology, science and statistics behind it because sometimes we ourselves use these points as an entry into discussion with non-believers we hope to convert to believers. What I want to see are other very credible people of the same or better calibre as those who are making these claims look at the evidence and point out all the flaws in it. I really don’t understand the attitude that we have to ignore it right off the bat and call the science behind it shoddy when most of us do not have such a background to do so. I don’t see this as the same as the DVC which really had nothing behind it besides Dan Brown’s imagination. This site was discovered during a dig, it contains ancient items - it really exists, it’s not make believe.
Click to expand...
I’m with you on this. If the Big News Of The Day supported Christianity in some way and skeptics were trying to debunk that, we’d be using the very same scientific and mathmatical methods being used in this situation. I watched three different programs cover this story this evening on CNN and I was very disappointed to see most, if not all, the Christians being interviewed about the claims appearing very nervous; they were speaking rapidly, one was shouting, none seemed able to offer any solid answers to any of the interviewers’ questions.
I’m hoping that as days go on, the claims that this is Jesus’ tomb will be shot down. :gopray2: James Cameron said that even he was skeptical at first, but is going on what they’ve been told by archaelogists and statisticians. He sounded very open to the possiblility that at any time, as soon as tomorrow, even, something new could possibly come to light, contradicting what they’re currently saying.

I’m hoping that this will be easily proven to be a hoax, but I have my doubts. 😦 It’s not like Dan Browns’ The DaVinci Code, where he, himself, writes that the book is a work of fiction. This is a major archaelogical discovery, not a story created by a fiction writer.

Another point I’d like to make is that Simcha Jacobovici stated that the other ossuary, the one some believe contains the remains of Jesus’ brother, James, hasn’t yet been declared false.

Our local news said that this is a debate that may go on for all eternity. Frankly, I’m not interested in listening to “experts” on either side debating 'till the cows come home. I would like to know the truth, regardless of which way it goes.

I’ve read a lot about the Shroud of Turin in recent months, including information from The Shroud of Turin
Website. I learned this evening that despite what I’ve been reading, claims that the carbon dating was done on a repaired piece of the cloth which explains the late date, it’s widely accepted that the Shroud is not from the time of Jesus.
I think this new controversy about the tomb is going to rage on like the Shroud debate, each side claiming they’re right, few people, if anyone, willing to keep an open mind and letting the information direct them, wherever it may eventually lead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top