Tomb Of Jesus

[Ouroboros]

I'm inclined to think the documentary may be right.

Me too, unless they discover the whole thing to be a hoax or fraud.

 

At least I will use it in arguments with Christians, since I've heard Christians ask "prove that Jesus is still dead" and such, well, here it is. He's dead, get over it.

[Grandpa Harley]

Just to bop this to the top once more...

 

Is the documentary available on line yet?

[Grandpa Harley]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ6s2xyFM80

 

Yes!

[Amanda]

At least I will use it in arguments with Christians, since I've heard Christians ask "prove that Jesus is still dead" and such, well, here it is. He's dead, get over it.

 

 

You are soooooo bad!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ6s2xyFM80

 

Yes!

 

Thanks Grandpa Harley!

 

Does anyone know what meaning the chevron symbol has?

[kevin]

I am currently watching this documentary. I'm not sure if anyone has come across this website: www.tombofjesus.com which is related to a BBC documentary: Did Jesus Die? Both documentaries would be acceptable imo regardless of where he was buried, since it would be more logical to say he was just a man. This was something that I thought would never be provable, but now we have two possible theories!

 

Kevin:

[Brother Jeff]

From http://www.archaeology.org/curiss/trenches/jesus.html:

 

Hype in the Holy Land Volume 60 Number 3, May/June 2007

by Eric A. Powell

 

Jesus's Family Tomb ignites biblical archaeology's latest media frenzy.

 

If you were anywhere near a computer, television, or newspaper in late February, you were probably at least momentarily in the grip of "The Jesus Family Tomb" publicity machine. Just in time for Lent, the Discovery Channel went into overdrive promoting a documentary film and accompanying book that contend a first-century A.D. tomb excavated in the Jerusalem suburb of Talpiyot once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth and his family, as well as Mary Magdalene. The news was greeted with a collective groan from biblical scholars, who in recent years have become accustomed to fielding reporters' calls about the latest archaeological bombshell from the Holy Land.

 

Produced by Academy Award-winning director James Cameron, the documentary follows journalist and filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici as he tries to link the Talpiyot Tomb to Jesus. The burial site contained at least six inscribed ossuaries, limestone boxes that Jews of the period used to hold bones of the dead. One reads "Jesus, son of Joseph" in Aramaic. Others bear the names Mary, Matthew, and Judah (who the documentary posits may be Jesus's son). Jacobovici proposes still another Talpiyot ossuary inscription can be translated as "Mary the Master," perhaps a reference to Mary Magdalene. (For a critique of the evidence, see "The Jesus Family Tomb on T.V.")

 

Jacobovici's last high-profile project was a documentary on the so-called James Ossuary, which bears an inscription reading "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." The Israeli Antiquities Authority (IAA) subsequently declared that the latter part of the inscription was a modern addition; its owner, antiquities collector Oded Golan, is now on trial in Jerusalem, charged with leading a forgery ring that may have faked a number of artifacts and inscriptions related to the Bible.

 

Unlike the James Ossuary, which surfaced from the murky world of the antiquities market, the ossuaries from the Talpiyot Tomb were scientifically excavated by archaeologists in 1980, and have been held in IAA storage ever since. While the authenticity of their inscriptions is not in question, Jacobovici's interpretation is.

 

"These are common names," says archaeologist Eric Meyers of Duke University, who has a number of problems with Jacobovici's research. "The investigation was conducted in secret over the past three years and all the parties involved signed non-disclosure agreements. That's not how you do archaeology. That's how you do show business, and it's a disservice to biblical archaeology."

 

The theory has found some cautious support from a few academics. New Testament scholar James Charlesworth of Princeton University, who attended a Discovery Channel press conference in New York, urged scholars to keep an open mind about the interpretation.

 

One of the original excavators of the Talpiyot site, Shimon Gibson, has expressed skepticism about the tomb's identification as Jesus's final resting place, but has voiced support for Jacobovici's efforts. James Tabor, chair of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, has emerged as the theory's main proponent.

 

Though Tabor published a book last year that made the case for Jesus being buried in Galilee, he has vigorously backed Jacobovici's interpretation of the Talpiyot Tomb, sending out a blizzard of e-mails on the subject to fellow scholars. He also maintains a blog, jesusdynasty.com/blog, that details his position. Though respected scholars, both Gibson and Tabor are no strangers to controversy. They excavated the so-called Cave of St. John the Baptist, which made headlines in 2004 when the two announced they had found a shrine to the saint that might even have been used by John himself to baptize followers.

 

Thanks to media coverage of discoveries like the Cave of St. John the Baptist and the Jesus Family Tomb, biblical archaeology has rarely before enjoyed so high a public profile. However, the scholarly world is not so enthusiastic about efforts to unearth archaeological proof of the Bible. "There is a tendency amongst archaeologists to play down the biblical account," says Eliezer Oren, an archaeologist at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. "The subject of biblical archaeology is no longer as popular [with academics] as it used to be."

 

A number of discoveries linked to the Bible that have made the news in recent years have been shown to be fakes, and, like the James Ossuary, many of them are included in the indictment of Oded Golan. The Talpiyot Tomb may play a role in the case, thanks to a geochemical analysis commissioned by Jacobovici. The study is said to link the James Ossuary to Talpiyot, raising the prospect that it was stolen from the tomb. A source close to Golan told Archaeology that the defense may use that thesis to help show the James Ossuary inscription is authentic, and that they could ask a representative from Jacobovici's team to testify on Golan's behalf.

 

The next sideshow of the Jesus Family Tomb media circus may yet play out in a Jerusalem courtroom.

 

Eric A. Powell is senior editor at ARCHAEOLOGY.

-----

© 2007 by the Archaeological Institute of America

www.archaeology.org/0705/trenches/jesus.html

[Jun]

They might as well say they've found a fairie bower.

[Grandpa Harley]

Amen, Brother Jun. Israeli archaeology is more politics than either science or history...

[kevin]

Watching this documentary has unsettled me somewhat. I was expecting it to be exposed as a fake, but the opposite has happened! It's too much of a coincidence that Mary Magdalene, James, Josa, and Judah are the names found on some of the other ossuaries in the tomb. If I were a christian, all this would have enormous implications, since the documentary suggests that Jesus and Mary were married and Judah was their son! No wonder the tomb was covered up and forgotten. It's opened up a can of worms that no one knows how to handle. As an ex-christian, I might have to accept that Jesus actually lived, which is something I did not believe was true. It will be interesting to see how the christian community handles this. I asked my wife to watch it (she's still a christian) but she refused. I expect that will be a typical response from many christians, who are really not interested in anything that would doubt the bible.

 

Kevin:

[mwc]

Watching this documentary has unsettled me somewhat. I was expecting it to be exposed as a fake, but the opposite has happened! It's too much of a coincidence that Mary Magdalene, James, Josa, and Judah are the names found on some of the other ossuaries in the tomb.

Then Simcha and the rest of those who made the documentary possible did their jobs. After all, it was his assertion that it was at least plausible, and you've now seemed to accept that.

 

Of course you've watched the documentaries about the other tombs and their contents. The documentaries about how the people in Simcha's own documentary are trying to distance themselves from him and it because of the way he represented things. The person who did the statistics has now revised it all and came to an entirely different conclusion. That's a really interesting show. But wait. Those aren't documentaries. You would have to search out that information and it won't be handed to you in a nice, well produced package, as his was. This is unfortunate.

 

If I were a christian, all this would have enormous implications, since the documentary suggests that Jesus and Mary were married and Judah was their son! No wonder the tomb was covered up and forgotten. It's opened up a can of worms that no one knows how to handle.

Only to modern xians is this a problem. To a 1st/2nd century Jewish-xian convert I can imagine the opposite. An unmarried man in his 30's that is a teacher/prophet of god? Unthinkable. Some "purity" nut cases got involved somewhere along the line and this meant that everyone had to keep it in their robes (and this only got worse over time...hitting its peak with the Catholics when they decided they wanted the priests property instead of letting them will it to family...so no more marriage for them).

 

As an ex-christian, I might have to accept that Jesus actually lived, which is something I did not believe was true. It will be interesting to see how the christian community handles this. I asked my wife to watch it (she's still a christian) but she refused. I expect that will be a typical response from many christians, who are really not interested in anything that would doubt the bible.

As an ex-c you should simply be open to knowledge. If that knowledge is that there really was a jesus, then there really was a jesus. Does it make him a god? It doesn't look like it from where I'm sitting. All this "discovery" proves is that there was a tomb with some dead people inside and they had some common names. It in no way, shape or form tie these people to the stories...at all. It failed to do this but you can choose to believe it is jesus and crew if you like. No one is stopping you.

 

Your wife and my wife alike. I knew there would be nothing in the show to "rock" her world but really just an interesting look at some places most people don't get to see around Israel (that's my take on the show). That didn't matter. She refused. Oh well. Her loss. Even though I thought the show failed to present its case I did find it entertaining. The same with all the xians out there. If they want to shy away from shows like this, or Harry Potter or whatever because it might test them or their faith or whatever then it is their loss.

 

mwc

[kevin]

A few renowned archaeologists have denounced this documentary as dishonest. The one thing that did amaze me whilst watching it, was why no one else had bothered to research into this before. I would have thought the collection of names would have got someone's attention. After watching it and thinking about it, I'm not sure what to believe any more.

 

Kevin:

[mwc]

A few renowned archaeologists have denounced this documentary as dishonest. The one thing that did amaze me whilst watching it, was why no one else had bothered to research into this before. I would have thought the collection of names would have got someone's attention. After watching it and thinking about it, I'm not sure what to believe any more.

Why would a common collection of names get anyone's attention?

 

As I've pointed out, possibly even in this thread, even if this was THE jesus why is his mother Mary buried here? Why isn't she with her husband or with "John" (she was "given" to the "loved" apostle after all). Why the slander against their "son?" There's no proof of any relationship between jesus and the other Mary so what if they're brother and sister? What if the other Mary and jesus were brother and sister? I don't recall the order of the boxes in the tomb but, and I could be mistaken, the older boxes should be near the back since it's first come first served. I don't believe jesus was in the back. Why not? He was the first to die. Who were the miscellaneous "others" in the tomb and their relationship? They were simply ignored because the producers had no explanation. They went to the flawed genealogies in the gospels and said that names existed in the family tree so "good enough." Not good enough. They never explained any connection of any of the people in the tomb. Not a single one. Their one attempt to do so failed and the person who did their statistics has now backed away from the whole thing. It's a failure on both fronts.

 

I could keep going but these items are plenty for now. The show simply failed to produce any results. I would have loved to had seen otherwise.

 

mwc

[mwc]

Actually, I had not real doubts and still do not have any that the Man Jesus probably lived and there is probably much in the

Bible about him that is true, it is the embellishments and alterations that were added down through the centuries that are what left me with many doubts. Let's face it, it would be hard to propogate a life story without at least some of it being true. Hell, in Tennessee, a known historical figure, Davey Crocket had many stories about him all through out the frontier of his day. Many of those stories are still handed down by people of East Tennessee and other nearby states in the Applacian Region.

Wow, really? Which parts? I've looked long and hard to separate the fact from fiction and I've been unable to do it. The more I look the less jesus remains.

 

Crocket, on the other hand, does have a bit of a record beyond the folk tales. There's something left of him once you strip away the layers unlike jesus.

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

It's like peeling an onion... suddenly there's nothing there and your fingers stink...

[mwc]

It is said that John the Baptist (who is also, in all likelihood also an imaginary fellow) was a "charismatic" leader and had quite a large following. He still has a cult to this day so he made quite an impact just like our good pal jesus.

 

So, why is it that Herod, when faced with a promise to a dancing female, simply runs out and kills JtB, this equally charismatic leader with a large following that is believed to be a prophet from god himself, with no repercussions (according to the bible) but he (and every other "power") in the area can't seem to get ahold of the less well known jesus and so they must plot, in secret, and make up charges and hold fake trials?

 

Herod wants you dead he grabs hold of you and makes you dead. JtB, from testimony in the bible itself, makes this perfectly clear. G.Mark says that the Pharisees were plotting with the Herodians in Galilee. This is the very same Herod that offed JtB. Later, this Herod doesn't seem aware of the plot, but no matter. It just shows that the whole "plotting to kill jesus" thing was a device used in the story.

 

There are a number of mentions, in real history, that shows the Romans behaved similarly towards those they deemed threats. No trials. No "plotting." It didn't work that way. An order was given and they carried it out. Jesus is a threat? Good-bye jesus. His followers could keep the movement alive? Good-bye followers. The next "rally" jesus had would have had Romans undercover in the audience and they would have simply attacked them. We know Pilate worked this way.

 

Too much effort is spent trying to make jesus out to be "special" somehow. That out of all the people of the time that they simply killed on the spot that he was the one that they plotted for a year of more trying to figure out how to deal with (and of course not write about). If the priests really wanted him dead they would have simply paid Herod, or someone else with the ability to do it, and he'd have been dead just like JtB. It's a propaganda piece.

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

I thought the Baptist made Josephus by name, which was more than Jesus did...

[mwc]

I thought the Baptist made Josephus by name, which was more than Jesus did...

That he did. He got quite a bit of attention (relatively speaking) but the condemnation of Herod by JtB is just that. It really seems the John cult just may have flourished first and once jesus finally got his name they needed to steal his thunder but Josephus had already finished his works and John's cult was the one who got the writeup.

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

I thought the Baptist made Josephus by name, which was more than Jesus did...

That he did. He got quite a bit of attention (relatively speaking) but the condemnation of Herod by JtB is just that. It really seems the John cult just may have flourished first and once jesus finally got his name they needed to steal his thunder but Josephus had already finished his works and John's cult was the one who got the writeup.

 

mwc

 

The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts by Bob Price of the HPL Glee club has some of the Simon Magus gospels in too, another 'also ran'

[mwc]

The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts by Bob Price of the HPL Glee club has some of the Simon Magus gospels in too, another 'also ran'

Now old Simon Magus I might allow for just because of the way they try to discredit him. It seems political enough (minus the magic and Peter of course) that it reads true. I think slander and lies never go out of style just like like trying to ride the coat tails of someone that is already famous, or perceived famous (doesn't matter which), to eventually propel your man to the top is a time honored tradition. We know during the transubstantiation they equated this guy with Elijah and Moses, so they needed a "modern" prophet too (but JtB was Elijah too so it's a little strange if you think about it even though he was supposed to be headless by then).

 

I think Simon could have been real so they couldn't piggy-back on his cause (and steal it away) so they had to discredit it. Now I could be wrong. John could have lived and they could have simply been using him as they used others but I think if he had existed that his followers would have had some actual information about him (was he related to jesus or not, did he meet jesus and follow him and so on) and they could object to their leader be usurped by the jesus freaks. This didn't seem to happen and the JtB movement went merrily along just as the jesus movement did...blissfully unaware of the details of their founder (to the best of my knowledge).

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts by Bob Price of the HPL Glee club has some of the Simon Magus gospels in too, another 'also ran'

Now old Simon Magus I might allow for just because of the way they try to discredit him. It seems political enough (minus the magic and Peter of course) that it reads true. I think slander and lies never go out of style just like like trying to ride the coat tails of someone that is already famous, or perceived famous (doesn't matter which), to eventually propel your man to the top is a time honored tradition. We know during the transubstantiation they equated this guy with Elijah and Moses, so they needed a "modern" prophet too (but JtB was Elijah too so it's a little strange if you think about it even though he was supposed to be headless by then).

 

I think Simon could have been real so they couldn't piggy-back on his cause (and steal it away) so they had to discredit it. Now I could be wrong. John could have lived and they could have simply been using him as they used others but I think if he had existed that his followers would have had some actual information about him (was he related to jesus or not, did he meet jesus and follow him and so on) and they could object to their leader be usurped by the jesus freaks. This didn't seem to happen and the JtB movement went merrily along just as the jesus movement did...blissfully unaware of the details of their founder (to the best of my knowledge).

 

mwc

BTW the Mandeans in Iraq are (perhaps 'were', since the Sunnis and the Shi'ais were both wiping them out) Gnositc Johanites, who thought Jesus was the Anti-Christ who'd usurped John's position as rightful messiah...

[Grandpa Harley]

More Mandean stuff from Iraq

 

Ironic they were safe under Saddam.... ah well, such is the price of toppling a dictator...

[NotBlinded]

It is said that John the Baptist (who is also, in all likelihood also an imaginary fellow)...

Ahhhhh...heresy!

 

The Cave of John the Baptist

 

[mwc]

It is said that John the Baptist (who is also, in all likelihood also an imaginary fellow)...

Ahhhhh...heresy!

 

The Cave of John the Baptist

 

Sniff? Sniff? Do I smell tourist money?

 

I've nothing against the fine folks that did the work on this but a cave does not a wilderness make. I've known of this cave for some time (as you might imagine) but seriously folks. Unless the whole story said jesus came out of the water and said "Ouch! I've hit my head on the fucking roof of your cave!" and lo! suddenly jesus claims to then see doves circling about his head and hearing "god" I've got my doubts.

 

mwc

[Grandpa Harley]

I once attended an outdoor baptism in an enthusiatic stream called the Cattle Brook... it was near horizontal sleet, the brook was in flood, and I had flu (but nothing short of death would have kept me away from that) Just after the lad getting baptised was having an asthma attack (he was sort of a parchment colour with blueish trim and making a noise like a fog horn crossed with a church organ) when, the swans arrived... (I had visions of the USS Indianapolis...) Then in the 'do' after the ghastly bloody woman who was his sponsor came out with the line 'I thought it was wonderful that a white bird attended, as it did at the baptism of Our Lord!' I nearly choked. I'm pretty certain that a hundredweight of irate swan was NOT what they meant... if it had been nearer breeding season we'd not have got him out alive...

 

Sorry, I digress

[RHEMtron]

Ive been gone for a year and i guess it's appropriate to make my forum return on an issue of death .

 

The interesting thing is, the earliest Christians [actually the Nazarenes] didn't believe in the virgin birth, rejected the David lineage, and believed Jesus to be man. This was the sect that was headed by Jesus' own brother James, and Peter. After James died, other family members of Jesus took over until they collapsed after the Jewish revolt in 132 AD. The point is, the early "Christians" at that time believed Jesus to be man... and this was by James the Just, Jesus' own brother... whom we all know took over after Jesus died and opposed Paul.

 

I love the question to ask the fundi: "Do Jesus' words stand on their own as divine, or do you need some miracle to make it click for you? If they really discovered his bones and he was no miracle man, are his words worthless to you? If so, then why do you call yourself a Christian?"

It's funny cause Jesus strongly and clearly lectured that people shouldnt look for, or use the appearance of miracles to prove God's divinity. A Christian who needs mircles to reaffirm their faith clearly didnt read what Jesus said.

 

-Rhem