Who belives the tomb of Jesus was found?

Answer 1

I'm a christian.

I'm actually interested to see how this all plays out. I find it very interesting that one of the ossuary boxes - the one that says "James, Son of Joseph, Brother of Jesus" was the one found a year or so back, and that its credibility has been attacked quite a bit.
Cameron's team claims that its been called into question because of a cleaning method used on the petina, and not because the petina (small deposits left in carvings after many years) was faked. From what I understand, and despite what the Discovery Channel is about to say, there is quite a lot of debate about that.

I think this is going to take a few years to play out, and I don't know if it is going to have as big of an impact as a lot of people think.

I guess we'll see. In my mind though ... and I might get hammered by some of the atheists and agnostics for saying this (and I may even deserve it) ... Faith is faith. Whether or not that tomb is real ... I'm still going to believe.

Answer 2

Well, what was found was a tomb, and some old bones, and some names scratched on ossuaries. They are all common names, even Jesus (Yeshua) was a common name. The chances of 2 common names being found in the same tomb does not strike me as an anomolous evernt. It is interesting, but what does it actually prove?

There is no record outside of the Bible that Jesus was a real person, and not just some legendary character like William Tell.

Even if there was a historical Jesus, how can they prove the bones are from THAT Jesus?? Jesus left behind no tangible evidence of a physical existence. It's not like CSI can go pull the DNA off his hairbrush to compare with the bones.

I'm an atheist, and I'm interested in archeology, but I don't think this is anything more than a cheap publicity stunt. The timing of the documentary alone, a few weeks before Easter makes for great press.

Answer 3

Cameron is pandering to the public and his "discovery" 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.

- If Jesus had remained in the tomb, first-century opponents of Christianity would most certainly have found His body and put it on public display.

- 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.

Kind of sad to see that all it takes is a press conference for folks to form life-altering opinions versus taking the time to rationally examine all the issues and dig a little deeper. It is the Macdonald's generation: fast, superficial, and never satisfying.

Answer 4

In John 20 a million-4 the scriptures do not say that Mary went on my own. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mum of Jesus, and Joanna have been the girls that went at the same time to the tomb interior the morning.

Answer 5

Jesus Christ was here over 2000 years ago, so how in the world can they say they have found the tomb of Jesus.
I've got a feeling James Cameron's career is going to suffer because of his imagination.

Answer 6

It's some pretty big archeological proof. We don't have much physical evidence that he existed at all. People should grasp on to this, but since it goes against the resurrection they think it makes Christianity less worthwhile.
I think Jesus being a man makes the religion MORE worthwhile. It means we all really can be like Jesus. If the religion taught that Jesus was a man, I might actually be a Christian.

Answer 7

Of course the tomb was found!! That isin the Bible.

What was not found however, was Jesus Christ's body - he was just not there. A tomb was an empty tomb!

Answer 8

James Cameron.

Answer 9

No,it is not the tomb of Jesus.

Answer 10

It matters not as most christians would deny it even with undeniable proof.

I do not believe the tomb of a fictional character will ever be found.