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 disappointing to see that all it takes is a press conference and a slick TV show for some 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.
Added:
In contrast other archaeological or historical discoveries, whether Christ actually rose from the dead or not is an event that one cannot NOT take a passionate view on. If He did not rise bodily then, to paraphrase Paul, the our faith is in vain and we are dead in our sins.
2007-03-05 08:27:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ask Mr. Religion 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The thing the churches fear even more than people possibly finding out Jesus was not resurrected, was married or had a child was that the documentary may actually lead to people thinking.
But based on people's answers here, I really don't think they have much to worry about.
2007-03-05 15:41:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it provided the participants in Yahoo Answers R&S section something to repeatedly post about. It is probably the number one topic now!
In any case, the Bible assures us in 1 Corinthians 15:42-46 that Jesus was raised as a spirit.
2007-03-05 15:37:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Abdijah 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
There needs to be a REAL excavation of the site. Not a 3 day quick look and then a report SIXTEEN YEARS LATER! I hope they prove that it is his tomb!
What would it disprove? Would Jesus's words be any less meaningful? Would his message be changed? No it wouldn't. The only thing is that it would make him MAN with man needs.
2007-03-05 15:37:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by hera 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
The documentary was pretty boring and I fell asleep during it, but we should keep an open mind about it. My biggest question, however, is why would Jesus and his family be buried in Jerusalem instead of Nazareth?
2007-03-05 15:48:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mark M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jesus's tomb only contained His bones until He resurrected on the third day. And what's been much talked of lately isn't it.
2007-03-05 15:37:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
I'm sure all the "good" christian folk will say it's a hoax.
2007-03-05 15:43:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ari A 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it was very interesting. I hope science and archeology prove it.
2007-03-05 15:35:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
4⤋
Another ploy to try and disprove Christianity. Many have tried but no one has succeeded.
2007-03-05 15:36:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
7⤋