Do you believe the claim?

Question

Okay you guys have read the newspaper about soem guy who has said to have found Jesus' tomb. I'm a Christain and I'm not saying that this is going to waver my faith or anything, but I want to hear from you guys and what you think: Chrisitian or not. Do you believe the claim? And if so/ or not why?

Answer 1

I am currently reading the book. I will not make a judgement until I have completed it. The evidence seems to be mostly in the inscriptions on the ossuraries found in the common tomb in Jerusalem together with some designs on the ossuaries.

Josey
Mary
Mary Miriamnene the master ( This is what Mary Magdalene was called according to some biblical scholars )
Jesus son of Joseph and Mary
Mathew
Judah son of Jesus

These are fairly common names but together it may or may not point to something. I prefer to reserve judgement until I have read all the evidence. I suggest doing the same.

Much of what has been reported on here and in the media is wrong. I suggest going to a reputable source.

Too many people reporting on this seem to have some ulterior motive. I just prefer to find the truth myself, and I currently am not at that stage, Yet.

The Josey is not suspected to be Jesus's father.

Answer 2

The tomb, among the many "bone boxes" within it, include one labeled "Joseph", another labeled "Jesus", a third labeled "Mary the master" and one labeled "Judah the son of Jesus"

Jesus was a common enough name that three other people, besides Christ, appear in the New Testament by that name. Mary is a common enough name that five, besides Mary Magalene, appear in the New Testament. And Judah (Jude, or Judas) was such a common name that four of Jesus' 12 disciple had that as one of their names. Plus one of his brothers.

Statsitcally, the odds of find those four names together in a cemetary were calculated (on the upcoming TV special) as being 100 to 1.

As this box labeled "Jesus" is the 71 such box to be found in the last 50 years, having it found with the other three names (it would be 1 in 71 found that way ) matchs it real close to what the odds are of randmonly finding those four names buried together.

There is no reason to believe that this "Jesus" is the one from the Bible. The three original archelologist who discovered the site all agree that it is NOT the body of the Bible Jesus.

Plus, why would Jesus' father Joseph, who lived in the northern country of Galilee, be buried in Jerusalem?

Why would Jesus and his family be buried in a town where they never lived? How could Jesus, who was not wealthy, have afforded marble coffins like that which cost a fortune each? They were very uncommon.

Why would Jesus (or since the theory is that Mary Magalene was pregnant at the time of the crucifixion and had the child after Jesus' death) have named his son "Judah" after the man who betrayed and murdered Jesus?

This finding was discredited back in 1980 when it was originally announced by secular scholars. It was discredited again after a 1996 British TV special by DNA testing which showed no family relationship between the "Mary" and the "Judah" in the graves.

But because James Cameron helped in the production of this new feature, it is getting a lot of publicity. But, there is still no evidence to support that the body of Jesus Christ has been found.

Answer 3

A) The original discovery was made in 1982.

B) The archaeologist who made it has since confessed that he faked the evidence. He's on trial for fraud, btw.

C) Why it CANNOT be Jesus and His family, (leaving out the Resurrection).
1} The vault is in Jerusalem. The Holy Family is from Nazareth. They had no family in Jerusalem.
2} Vaults are for the upper middle class and the wealthy. The Holy Family was neither.
3} The original claim had Joseph in one of those bone boxes. Joseph predeceased Mary, Jesus et al by a number of years. His remains would not have been there.
4} The claims of DNA evidence are bunk! To make a DNA claim you have to have someone else's DNA to compare it to. Who they gonna use? King David? Gimme a break!
5} According to the rituals of the time, the bodies of the poor were not embalmed. They were washed, annointed with oils and herbs, left on a slab and allowed to decompose. Slabs could be rented for this purpose from wealthy Jews who had the wherewithal to afford a rock-cut tomb. About a year later, the bones were removed, cleaned of any extraneous tissue and placed in ossuaries (bone boxes). The ossuaries were almost always buried in secret locations. WHY? Because they feared necromancers stealing the bones and using them for nefarious purposes. Despite their strong faith in God, these were still a very superstitious people. Remember "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"? That's a mistranslation. The correct word is not witch, but necromancer.
6} The vault in question is known to be an upper middle class merchant's family tomb. And it was NOT Joseph of Arimathea's. That too is known.
7} James Cameron is trying to capitalize on the astounding material success of last year's "DaVinci's Code"; another in a seemingly endless attempt to "debunk" Christianity.
8} How long is it gonna take people to figure out that this is merely another attack on the Faith? And how much longer after that will it take to figure out that attacks like this are NOT made unless the attacker has something to fear from the victim? Get it stright people. The devil, by whatever name you call him, has followers too. And they hate above all things, the Faith of Christ. They hate everyone else too, but Christians are definitely at the top of their s**t list.
9} Mr. Cameron is either a greedy idiot, a fool who's easily duped or a knowing co-operative in this war between Satan and God. Take your pick.
10} Waste your time if you must, but it's old news folks and not very interesting news at that.
D) Why can I say all this? Because I'm a degreed anthropologist with a specialty in near-Eastern archaeology, as well as a degreed theologian, both comparative and dogmatic.

Answer 4

As an Atheist, I highly doubt that this is the actual tomb of Jesus. It is being reported in a highly sensational manner, which is very suspicious. The discovery was made 30+ years ago and the translation of names took 10 years, and all of the names are very common for the time.

Answer 5

I'm an atheist and I think that while the tomb is a real tomb and the osuaries are real osuaries and that they were found in that tomb, that this has nothing at all to do with the Yshua bar-Ysef who created the philosophy that Paul later used to found Christianity.

Answer 6

No I personally do not. It is an old rehashed claim of the same tomb discussed in the 80's if you remember that. Its nothing new. Besides the fact that Joseph was a poor man and not a resident of the town the tomb was in. he could have never afforded the tomb and why would the whole family be buried in a foreign town. Its just bizarre.

Answer 7

I am a christian by faith. I do not believe on a mere story from a newspaper about the supposed tomb of Jesus found somewhere in India. it is just an indication of false pretense to raise money. Why believe on a film show, TV show or movie show . the story is the same with the davinci code. a noble fiction and a drama to attract people in order to earn sum of money.

Answer 8

Did he find a empty tomb? Jesus body was gone the next morning when Mary Magdalene and the other women arrived there. There are four accounts of this in the bible. So there would be no body. If there is a body, it is not the Tomb that Jesus was buried in.

Answer 9

It does bring light to the fact that practically everyone was named Jesus, Joseph, James brother of Jesus, and Mary, Mary, quite contrary. What shred of evidence is there that the jesus in question, resurrected, or was the son of god?

By the way, Lazarus was brought back from the dead, and I always wondered where he was living today, or what happened to his bones. I used to think he was Strom Thurmond, but he died, so Lazarus he was not.

Answer 10

No, the DNA tests were not very good only showing that "Jesus" and "Mary Magdalene" are not related by blood, the names are too common, and the inscriptions on the ossuaries were different languages leading to the idea that they were from different generations. There is evidence for it to be true, but much better evidence that it isn't.