Do anyone believe whether or not that they really the bones of Jesus?

Answer 1

no, for a number of reasons:
1. it would be impossible to prove
2. those names were extremely common back then, so it could just be a coincidence
3. they have not yet offered us enough proof - maybe when the doco comes out there will be more proof, but until then no.

for those idiots above who say they cant be his bones because it was too long ago and the bones would have disintegrated by now, do some research before opening your mouths. um, hello! dinosaur bones are still being found, and they were around long before the time of jesus christ. jesus was only 2000 odd years ago. dinousaurs were millions and millions of years ago. cave men were millions of years ago. egyptian mummies were thousands and thousands of years ago. how completely ignorant. skeltons and bones can survive for quite a while - and jesus's bones could definately have survived that long (not that these bones are necessarily his though).

Answer 2

jesus according to his followers was the SON OF GOD...not the son of joseph, so why wouldn't they proclaim this on his astuery. Why would they put the son of Joseph if they risked everything following Jesus because he was the Son of God.

As far as saying anything about the bible saying he ascended into heaven, I do believe that his soul ascended into heaven, but he was man as well. THE WHOLE BELIEF IS THAT JESUS IS HALF MORTAL AND HALF DIVINE. So that belief hits the fan when he dies, I do believe his bones are somewhere, but I don't think we will ever know for sure.

They could possibly be his bones or they could be the bones of another JESUS ( a popular name at the time) who happened to have parents with Joseph and Mary (also popular names at the time). Too much speculation and not enough fact.

There is absolutely no way to know. There are so many unanswered questions, but they do make an extremely strong point. That was actually a very compelling show last night. What ticked me off was the fact that the IAA lady came and told them that they couldn't go into the tomb that supposedly belonged to JESUS, because parents were scared that their children would fall in the hole, but it was late and their kids should have been in bed. There are also too many things that they had to connect by six degrees of seperation Too much speculation and not enough fact.

Answer 3

I’m surprised that of all the replies here, nobody at all makes any reference to the circumstances of this find. First, ring the bells – THERE WERE NO BONES FOUND IN THE OSSUARIES IN QUESTION!!!
Traditionally, Jews of the time kept the bones of their dead ancestors in these clay urns, and then later buried them. The “evidence” found – I believe that this was James Cameron of Titanic fame who funded the excavation – consisted of some of these ossuaries (literally containers for bones) and which had the names of Jesus and Mary on them, and another with James (who could be Jesus’ brother) and one which might have have had some variant of the name Mary Magdalene on it. End of story. As even the non-Christian Israeli experts noted these names were exceedingly common in ancient Jerusalem, and in any case, Jesus’ remains, (had there been any) would have been taken back to Galilee. You know, seekers of truth, Google is just one finger press away, and so is Wikipedia.
Should mention something on the associated silliness of the Da Vinci code. Had Mary Magdalene actually gone to Gaul (Ancient France) upon the death of Jesus, and were she really pregnant with their child, then that Semitic genetic material would by now, 2000 years later, be fairly well spread throughout all 40 million frogs resident there. So much for one young photogenic French girl being the only remaining member of the “royal bloodline”. What a joke!. Take one couple having say three children every 35 years (a generation) and see many countless millions would have every claim to be part of the “royal bloodline”.

Answer 4

Apparently most archaeologists don't believe it, which in my mind casts serious doubt on the claim that they actually found the bones of Jesus. Besides, the names on the (not coffins, but I forget what they are really called) were all very common names when Jesus was around 2000 years ago (even Jesus was a very common name) so you can't go by names alone.

I think it would be really cool if they actually did find the bones of Jesus (it wouldn't conflict with my faith at all) but I think it would take some very extraordinary evidence to prove they actually found his bones. Even if his bones do exist somewhere, I doubt they'll ever find them and know for sure they are his.

Answer 5

There is quite literally no way of proving that they are the bones of Jesus. I'm not sure why people think a DNA test will do anything, I mean what DNA are they going to compare it to?

It truly amazes me that many people who go around saying Christians will believe any silly story because they believe in the Bible, are some of the same ones that buy into this and think there is some sort of "proof".

This is a lot of hype over literally nothing. In the end you'll end up with two people "believing" one way or the other about it, and nothing definitive. I think James Cameron is laughing over the money he will make over this.

Answer 6

Anything is possible! The Bible WAS written hundreds of years AFTER the crucifiction of Christ. Most men even Holy men WERE married at the time and it would have been quite strange for a man of his age NOT to be married. Also many historian throughout the years have speculated that many of the passages were written as examples to live by and possibly the powers that be at the time thought they would have more wieght if they were stories of a "God" and not just a true and wonderful prophet. Does it really matter? To me the teachings are JUST as valid either way. We will probably never know the truth for sure so I say it matters only what you believe!

Answer 7

No disrespect intended...yet...What difference does it make ? Jesus was born, walked the Earth, carried out the Holy plan...He left His earthly physical body...The remains of His body deteriorated and there were bones left behind.

Jesus Christ is who He is and that still is felt today...What difference does it make if someone found His remains of bones or not ? If it was discovered that what was found is in fact the bones of Jesus...what would be done with that information...What would be done with the bones. . . to look at them and put them on display ?

Jesus is not any BONES...He is heart, soul, message, Word . . .

Personally I could care less about any bones...I think of the message of a person...especially Jesus Christ.
.

Answer 8

Of course they aren't the bones of Jesus. Jesus Isn't on earth. If you read the bible it states that Jesus went up to heaven. It's believable that they found the tomb, but not the bones.

Answer 9

of course they are not his bones he raised from the dead and he would not leave his bones behind. Jesus said the world would be deceived and this is a sure case of it, the thing is the bible said he raised from the dead and they don't want to believe it. The bible is not a lie it is the truth he did raise from the dead and sits at the right hand of God end of story and I love him so munch.

Answer 10

If the Bible is true, then Jesus didn't leave any bones behind because he was taken up to heaven.

If the Bible is not true, and Jesus was just another guy, then who cares what happened to his bones?