I heard they found Jesus tomb, so what now christianity is over, can somone tell me wats going on with that.?

Answer 1

ITS NOT OVER!! wont ever end!!

Answer 2

I am amazed by Cameron's claims of statistics supporting him. I would love to know how they figured the statistics. After all, you can prove anything with statistics.

And then, not sure if the name is Jesus or not. And Jesus was a common name, as was Mary. Heck, how many Marys get mentioned in the New Testament? Every other woman in Israel at the time was called Mary, so that name proves nothing.

Cameron just wants to make money and he knows some will believe him.

Answer 3

First of all.. no one is making a statement as definitive as yours. The documentaries tend to simply lay out the facts and they've seen them, prsent experts pro and con, and in the end say YOU REACH YOUR OWN CONCLUSION.

I watch many a documentary on the Science, Discovery & History Channel. I have yet to find one that ends by telling you... "SO IT'S A FACT."

Of course, non-believers will use this as a "factual club" to beat Christians over the head with, as they've been beating them over the head with the "fact" of Evolution.... and to further back their accusations of stupidity and low IQ on the part of anyone who is a believer.

Now as a Christian, allow me to give you the flip side of this. James Cameran worked on this documentary with the director of a director of another documentary, one where he claimed that an Ostuary containing the bones of James, the Brother of Jesus. All kinds of scientific tests were done to "prove" this finding. Well it turns out a later documentary was produced, by the History Channel I think, showing it had all been a hoax and how the guy who CREATED these ostuaries did it.

The bottom line is that the only definitive fact in this entire saga is that James Cameron is receiving what he wants: publicity.

Answer 4

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 5

They didn't, another "DaVinci code" bit of nonsense.

The recent tomb controversy serves as a reminder of how much skepticism the Christian church has endured. The fact that God has spoken, and has done so reliably confounds non-believers. They've tried so many different angles to suppress this truth and hide the fact they are responsible to His Holy Word.
In 1778, H.S. Reimarus argued Jesus was a Jewish zealot failing to set up his Messianic kingdom. To help keep the cause alive, the disciples stole his body and fabricated stories about the resurrection. In 1835, David Strauss published an influential book entitled, The Life of Jesus. He presented a work seeking to discredit the reliability and historicity of the gospels. The historical accounts of Jesus were myths. One couldn't trust the Bible to present any accurate information about Jesus. In 1901, William Wrede published The Messianic Secret. Wrede posited Mark added fictitious material of Jesus being the Messiah. In 1906 Albert Schweitzer released: The Quest of the Historical Jesus. His work concludes, "...[I]t is not Jesus as historically known, but Jesus as spiritually arisen within men who is significant for our time and can help it." So much for the historical records.
And of course there was the onslaught of form criticism. These critics argued the oral tradition containing the historical facts about Jesus suffered considerable corruption. By the time it was written down, the Gospel accounts were nowhere near being historical truth. The early church was so devious, they couldn't be trusted to give an accurate account of the life of Jesus. They even mixed in stories and elements from non-Christian ancient literature. They controlled the facts and put forth what they wanted to. The form critics, bowing at the alter of Rationalism, defined miracles out of existence.
And of course, lets not leave out the supposed suppressed evidence about Jesus. Facts and tidbits from spurious later non-biblical gnostic material somehow or other present the bigger picture of the true Jesus. These later apocryphal traditions rejected by the early church find their place front and center for such modern works like The Lost Years of Jesus. Jesus spends 17 years in India, even though the gospel accounts ask, "Isn't this the carpenter's son?" Shouldn't they be asking, "Isn't this the mystic from India?" And it gets sillier and sillier. Morton Smith from Columbia University explained Jesus was a magician. He used illusion and hypnosis to leave his mark on history. Perhaps the most bizarre was the hypothesis of John Allegro, the Semitic scholar who wrote The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross. Jesus wasn't a real historical person, but was rather a code name for a hallucinogenic mushroom. The men who wrote the New Testament were the ancestors of the New Age hippies, working out cryptograms for an ancient fertility cult. Then in the early 1980's the world was given Holy Blood, Holy Grail. The book argues Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had 6 kids. Years later the same fiction made millions being retold in the Da Vinci Code.
Like dominos falling, all these arguments, spanning hundreds of years have failed. They differ in hypothesis, and many with each other, proving they can't make sense of the evidence they are evaluating. Now we're going to get a chance again to tune to the Discovery Channel (home of such notable epics as "The Search for Bigfoot") to see the same futile efforts. Scholars, philosophers, and historians failed to conquer Jesus and keep Him buried; now filmmakers will be shooting their cap guns at God. At the heart of this new documentary is a worldview positing a denial of sola scriptura. The latest tomb controversy is simply another attempt to run from the fact that God has spoken. Rather than being scared by this new documentary, I look forward once again to watching God and His Word prove its reliability and authority. The Psalmist said, "Your word, O Lord is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens." Imagine, filmmakers versus God. Now, if there was ever an unfair fight, this is it.

Answer 6

Statistics based on names? How ridiculous. After Our Savior lived probably one out of every two families chose the names Joseph, Mary, Jesus, Simon, etc. for their children.

Answer 7

Feb. 26, 2007, 2:11PM
James Cameron's Lost Tomb of Christ faces criticism


By KAREN MATTHEWS
Associated Press

TOOLS
Email Get section feed
Print Subscribe NOW
NEW YORK — Filmmakers and researchers on Monday unveiled two ancient stone boxes they said may have once contained the remains of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, but several scholars derided the claims made in a new documentary as unfounded and contradictory to basic Christian beliefs.

"The Lost Tomb of Jesus," produced by Oscar-winning director James Cameron and scheduled to air March 4 on the Discovery Channel, argues that 10 small caskets discovered in 1980 in a Jerusalem suburb may have held the bones of Jesus and his family.

One of the caskets even bears the title, "Judah, son of Jesus," hinting that Jesus may have had a son, according to the film.

"There's a definite sense that you have to pinch yourself," Cameron said Monday at a news conference. He told NBC'S "Today" show earlier that statisticians found "in the range of a couple of million to one" in favor of the documentary's conclusions about the caskets, or ossuaries.

Simcha Jacobovici, the Toronto filmmaker who directed the film, said that a name on one of the ossuaries — "Mariamene" — offers evidence that the tomb is that of Jesus and his family. In early Christian texts, "Mariamene" is the name of Mary Magdalene, he said.

The very fact that Jesus had an ossuary would contradict the Christian belief that he was resurrected and ascended to heaven.

Most Christians believe Jesus' body spent three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City. The burial site identified in Cameron's documentary is in a southern Jerusalem neighborhood nowhere near the church.

In 1996, when the British Broadcasting Corp. aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged the claims. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.

"They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.

Shimon Gibson, one of three archaeologists who first discovered the tomb in 1980, said Monday of the film's claims: "I'm skeptical, but that's the way I am. I'm willing to accept the possibility."

The film's claims, however, have raised the ire of Christian leaders in the Holy Land.

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.

"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."

"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 — 10 being completely possible — it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."

Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun." Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.

Kloner also said the filmmakers' assertions are false. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time," he said.

William Dever, an expert on near eastern archaeology and anthropology, who has worked with Israeli archeologists for five decades, said specialists have known about the ossuaries for years.

"The fact that it's been ignored tells you something," said Dever, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona. "It would be amusing if it didn't mislead so many people."

Osnat Goaz, a spokeswoman for the Israeli government agency responsible for archaeology, said the Antiquities Authority agreed to send two ossuaries to New York, but they did not contain human remains. "We agreed to send the ossuaries, but it doesn't mean that we agree with" the filmmakers, she said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Associated Press Writer Marshall Thompson contributed to this report from Jerusalem and AP Religion Writer Rachel Zoll contributed from New York.

Answer 8

Wow! they found the tomb. The tomb was never said to have ascended. So to be Christ-like will never end. You think?

Answer 9

I'm surprised you are so gullible for an atheist. I assume you're an atheist because if you were a Christian you would know that Jesus ascended in bodily form to heaven and is not buried anywhere. huh.

Answer 10

the discovery has no effect on Christianity whatsoever. Jesus, Mary, Joseph & Judas were not uncommon names.

Answer 11

Same tomb they ound over 20 years ago and already found to be inaccurate. you can check it all out at the following website: http://articles.pointofview.net/Docs/Tales_from_the_Crypt.pdf