There's a new documentary coming out about Jesus' grave. It shows how Jesus had a wife and a son!?

Question

I was wondering that if this were ever proven to be true, how it would affect Christians and how it would affect the world, in the long run?

Here's a link:
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/tomb.html

Remember, I'm less interested in a debate of the story as I am "What would Christians do if Christianity were disproven? and what Longterm effects it would have onthe World - in your opinion?

Answer 1

It won't affect Christians because even if it could be proven that it was actually Jesus they would deny it anyway.

Drink

Answer 2

It is not true so the sub-part to your question is academic.

Cameron is pandering to the public and his "find" will be proven to be just bad science:

- The statistical analysis is not rigorous

- The name "Jesus" was a popular name at that time, appearing in 98 other tombs and on 21 other ossuaries

- There is no historical evidence that Jesus was ever married or had a child

- The earliest followers of Jesus never called him, "Jesus, son of Joseph"

- It's unlikely Joseph, who had died earlier in Galilee, would have been buried in Jerusalem

- The Talipot tomb and ossuaries probably would have belonged to a rich family, which is not a historical match for Jesus

- Fourth-century church historian Eusebius makes quite clear the body of James, brother of Jesus, was buried alone near the temple mount.

- The two Mary ossuaries do not mention anyone from Migdal, but just Mary, a common name

- By all ancient accounts, the tomb of Jesus was empty, making it unlikely that any body was moved, allowed to decay for a year, then be put into an ossuary.

- Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the conclusions cannot be supported by the evidence – but it's a way to make money on television. He would have nothing to do with supporting the movie's assertions. "It's nonsense," he said.

- James, the half-brother of Jesus and author of the book of James, the early leader of the church in Jerusalem, was martyred for his faith. Why does James make no mention in his letter that Jesus was not bodily resurrected? When he was about to die why didn't he just recant his beliefs and say, 'Okay, okay! My brother didn't rise from the dead. Here's where we took him. Here's where his bones are. Here's our family tomb. We made the whole thing up?' People will generally not die for a lie when they know it's a lie. Why would James die perpetuating a lie when it would have been so easy to disprove? In fact why would any of the apostles go to their deaths for something they knew to be false?

As I have expected, there has been **no scientific or historical find** that has ever been shown to disprove the authenticity of the bible's history or theology.

Answer 3

People will say and do anything to discredit what they know nothing about. Think about it, what would Christ do with a wife and son knowing he was going to die on the cross? Why would he want to leave his family that he could have had maybe 40 or 50 more years to enjoy? Who was his wife and son? If he came straight from heaven, where did his wife come from? What woman was without sin to even be worthy to be his wife? There all kinds of questions that people cannot answer, because saying that Jesus had a wife is just a ploy to distract people from the true mission that Jesus had on this earth. People don't understand the seriousness of the life of Jesus and his mission. Families are natural, he had a mom and a dad, some sisters and brothers, some cousins, etc, but that is all of the family that he had. His mission was spiritual, he didn't come down here to get married. It wouldn't effect me or the true believers, because we know and understand what Jesus came here to do.

Answer 4

It is not proving that Jesus had a son. The documentary is regarding a tomb that has 6 ostuaries. The claim is that Jesus remains are among them. It is also claiming that Mary Magdalene is among the remains, along with a son, Judah. The problem with the theory is that they have done DNA testing to prove that the so called Jesus remains is not biologically related to the so called Mary magdalene remains, but they have not done any DNA testing to prove whether the child was biologically linked to either the so called Jesus or Mary remains. Wouldn't the latter test be a more significant find.

Answer 5

It this were to be proved true, it would hurt the Christian faith. However, there is no way this can be proved. In that time, both names for Jesus and Mary were very common and just because they found a grave with those same names engraved on it does not mean it was THE Jesus and THE Mary. So they have a way to go to prove anything.

Answer 6

The only problem I would have with it is the finding of the bones since I, and most Christians believe, that Jesus resurrected and ascended to heaven. Whether or not he had a wife and a child/children is of no consequence to me since it has little bearing on his divine nature.

Answer 7

Those who have been "born again" have witnessed the power of Christ's resurrection....but those who have not are susceptible to deceptions like this.

Although even then, being prudent about the evidence itself (and the circumstances under which it is being brought about) would lead the diligent to be extremely skeptical about such weak evidence. Professor L. Michael White, of the University of Texas, for instance said he doubted the claims were true. "This is trying to sell documentaries," he said, adding a series of strict tests needed to be conducted before a bone box or inscription could be confirmed as ancient. "This is not archeologically sound, this is fanfare."

Answer 8

Yeah and there are probably thousands of graves in Mexico with the name Jesus on them, and many of them probably had families.
It was a common name, and still is in parts of the world.
There is no way to prove it true partly because they would need DNA to match it to, which there is none of, but mostly because Jesus rose from the dead and his body assended into Heaven.

Answer 9

Many will claim that it wouldnt make a difference. I doubt this - if it wouldnt make a difference, then why all the fuss? truth is, if it turned out to be real and true and not up to any questions whatsoever, this would prove the Bible to be false, and Christianity to be a lie. that would destroy the faith of a large segment of our population...

As far as the world goes, it might mean the death throes of religion - or at least this one religion. And that can only be a good thing in the long run.

Answer 10

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.