If they were able to prove beyond a doubt that the body in the tomb was Jesus', would you stop believing?

Question

I know it wouldn't be possible to prove beyond a doubt that the body found is Jesus' and I know most of the proof says it isn't, but say they could prove it was. If you are a Christian, would you stop believing, or would you just change ur beliefs to like "Jesus spiritually rose" or would you think that it was a big scam that God put on earth to see who the true believers are?

I just thought I should add that I realize the tomb stuff is just stupid, and I also realize that even if it had more substantial evidence supporting it, no one would ever know for sure. It is just a hypothetical question: if they could prove it 100% that it was Jesus' body, would you stop believing in Christianity?

Answer 1

Filmmaker James Cameron is claiming he and some archeologists found the tomb of Jesus’s family. All the casket-like things called ossuaries are empty. I wonder what the archeologists were thinking when they found an ossuary with Jesus’s name on it. I can imagine the moment they removed the lid and looked in. If it were me, I’d wonder if I was going to see one of the following:

1. Nothing
2. Decomposed stuff
3. Jesus sitting up and saying, “What in Dad’s name took you so long?”

If you put an ordinary guy in an ossuary for 2,000 years, he’d clearly be dead. But if I were opening that ossuary I’d be wondering if maybe someone put Jesus in there after he died but before he arose. And maybe it’s hard to get out once you get in. I’d be worried that Jesus arose inside the stone box, and he’d be totally pissed that no one let him out until now.

I realize that this would not be the most rational worry in the world. But I like to base my worries on an expected value calculation. So for example, a 90% chance of getting a sliver would worry me about the same as a .000001% chance of a nuclear bomb going off in the backyard. In this ossuary example, I’d be looking at maybe a 2% chance of waking up an angry Jesus. I say that’s worth a worry.

If Jesus was in there, and sat up when I took the lid off, I’d first try to judge how angry he looked. If he had that money-changers-in-the-temple look, I’d go with a joke, like “Ha ha! Turn the other cheek!” Or maybe I’d try to explain to him that the extra suffering was extra good for humanity, and after all, that’s his job. Then I’d say, “Hey, I don’t like my job either, but you don’t see me complaining all the time.”

I know that some of you will say that if Jesus could move that big rock that was allegedly in front of his tomb in the traditional telling of his life, he’d have no trouble removing an ossuary lid. But he wasn’t supposed to be in an ossuary in the first place, so obviously if this ossuary is genuine, some of the details of the story were wrong. And if God let Jesus be crucified, it’s not a huge stretch of the imagination to think he’d let him stay in a stone box for 2,000 years. It makes sense to save your coolest miracle for when it’s needed most. And I think you’ll agree that this would be a good time for a messiah. And if you were God, you’d want James Cameron attached to this production. So it makes sense to me.

That’s why I’d be a crappy archeologist. I’d be afraid to open anything.

Answer 2

2000 years of misguidence.

They wouldn't stop believing if god himself told them they had it all wrong. They would find a way of disproving it with some bible verse that means nothing to any logical person.

EDIT*
"funny question cause at that time 48 percent of men were named jesus and a higher number percent were named mary so gee look at the stats"

WE DID LOOK AT THE STATS!!! 600to1 FOR!!! What are the odds that a single family tomb from the right time period would have a family with the exact names as layed out in your own book?

No one knows for sure if it's them or not. But in 2000 years when someone comes to my family cemetary and finds Michael son of John they will know it's me, why? Because all my famility is there and you can narrow it down.

Answer 3

Stop believing what? Jesus was a man! It's not like he had wings or a built on halo. What does spiritual essence have to do with the physical body? The flesh returns to the ground and the spirit rises but who doesn't know that?

Answer 4

NO

After Jesus was resurrected, many times, many did not know it was him if he did not make sure they knew.

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
1Cor.15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

Answer 5

Honestly,the whole thing is bunk.Even non-Christians,in droves,are criticising the film's theory,for quite few reasons.

The most popular names in that era for males were:
Simon
Joseph
Eleazar
Judah
John
Jesus
Hananiah
Jonathan
Matthew
Manaen/Menahem
The most popular female names for that era were:
Mary/Mariamne
Salome
Shelamzion
Martha

In that era,21% of Jewish women were named Mary!

There is no other DNA sample of Jesus or His family to compare the remains with!Allthe DNA proves,is that the ones in the tomb were related!

Jesus' family were not even from Jerusalem.Jospeh's home he grew up in was in Bethlehem,and Jesus and his family lived in Galilee.Why would they be buried in Jerusalem,where they had no connection?

There is absolutely no evidence supporting the idea that Jesus was married or had a child,biblical or non-biblical.

The ossuaries that mention Mary,do not have any other descriptive features.They simply say 'Mary'.

The 'James son of Joseph,brother of Jesus' ossuary,which the makers of this film used to try and back up their claim,has been proven to be a forgery.

The main scholar who is the source for the story does not think it is Jesus' tomb.

Says Bar-Ilan University Professor Amos Kloner,"..those were the most common names found among Jews in the first centuries BCE and CE"

Prof. Amos Kloner, the Jerusalem District archeologist who officially oversaw the work at the tomb in 1980 and has published detailed findings on its contents, on Saturday night dismissed the claims. "It makes a great story for a TV film," he told The Jerusalem Post. "But it's impossible. It's nonsense." “"They just want to get money for it,"
Prof. Kloner said there was no way the tomb housed the Holy Family.
The senior Israeli archaeologist who thoroughly researched the tombs after their discovery, and at the time deciphered the inscriptions, cast serious doubt on it.
"It is just not possible that a family who came from Galilee, as the New Testament tells us of Joseph and Mary, would be buried over several generations in Jerusalem."

Kloner said the names found on the ossuaries were common, and the fact that such apparently resonant names had been found together was of no significance. He added that "Jesus son of Joseph" inscriptions had been found on several other ossuaries over the years."There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb," Kloner said. "They were a Galilee family with no ties in Jerusalem. The Talpiot tomb belonged to a middle-class family from the 1st century CE."

"Archeological evidence shows that chances of these being the actual
burials of the Holy Family are almost nil," said Motti Neiger, a spokesman for the
Antiquities Authority.


"Simcha has no credibility whatsoever," says Joe Zias, who was the curator for anthropology and archeology at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem from 1972 to 1997 and personally numbered the Talpiot ossuaries. "He's pimping off the Bible … He got this guy Cameron, who made 'Titanic' or something like that—what does this guy know about archeology? I am an archeologist, but if I were to write a book about brain surgery, you would say, 'Who is this guy?' People want signs and wonders. Projects like these make a mockery of the archeological profession."

Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight. "How possible is it?" he said. "On a scale of one through 10 - 10 being completely possible , it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."


The official report written by Prof. Kloner found nothing remarkable in the discovery. The cave, it said, was probably in use by three or four generations of Jews from the beginning of the Common Era. It was disturbed in antiquity, and vandalized.

Answer 6

The bible says he was seen in the clouds. That tells us he was still in his material body. Since we know that flesh and blood cannot enter heaven then God must have disposed of his body somewhere. But whatever the bible teaches is the truth. The body of Christ is not important now. It is just another device of satan to try to get us distracted from serving God.

Answer 7

i believe in god and am a christian. i just dont see how ppl claim to love everyone...blah blah blah if his body was still on earth what would be the big deal. if you love him from words what would be so bad about his remains..and yes i do know how the story goes. god is god and you should love him no matter who ur god is and have some understanding for others!

Answer 8

>>If they were able to prove beyond a doubt that the body in the tomb was Jesus', would you stop believing?<<

Yes, if there was no doubt that it was THE Jesus (His name was/is very common).

"If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain." - 1 Corinthians 15:14

Answer 9

funny question cause at that time 48 percent of men were named jesus and a higher number percent were named mary so gee look at the stats

Answer 10

There isn't even a J in the Hebrew language, so no, it was not a common name.. ("Yeshua" MIGHT have been, but def. not as common as ms. 50% says) Either way, I doubt it is his tomb, as I doubt he existed at all...