March 03, 2007
Was the Tomb of Jesus found by James Cameron?
Since the Titanic, James Cameron hasn’t done much as a director. But this week he produces a new documentary that has stirred a ton of controversy: The Tomb of Jesus airs on the Discovery channel this weekend. The documentary claims that Jesus’ tomb was found with his family – including his wife, Mary Magdalene and their son. Is this true? And what does it mean, if so?
Ramifications: Who Cares if the Tomb of Christ is found?
Before we examine the claims, it’s important to understand what the claim means. What are the ramifications if the tomb of Jesus has been found? Here are the big ones:
- The Bible is false. The central claim of the Bible is that Jesus was physically raised from the dead after three days, rather than entombed. If this claim is proven false, the Bible cannot be believed as a honest account of the events of Jesus’ life.
- The Catholic Church is false. For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has taught that Jesus rose bodily from the dead in accord with Scripture. If His tomb was found, she is wrong and her claim to infallibility is gone. In addition, her teachings on the Resurrection saving us are wrong, which means . . .
- All of Christianity is dead. The Christian faith claims that Jesus died for our sins as the perfect sacrifice and that this sacrifice is what allows us to go to heaven. If Jesus died like regular men, then He is not God and thus cannot save us from our sins.
Our faith is based upon the pillar of Christ’s death and resurrection. If His body is found, then He was not resurrected as we have been told. All of our faith would then be in vain.
Evidence: What does the Documentary Claim?
The documentary claims that a tomb found by Amos Kloner 27 years ago contains the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene, and their child, among others. They base much of their evidence on numbers: the statistical chances that a tomb would contain Jesus’ name along with other graves containing those believed to be Jesus’ family during that time.
The proof from Cameron’s point of view lies in possibilities: what is the possibility of a tomb containing a grave labeled “Jesus” from that time period. He extrapolates this to be proof of Jesus’ remains.
So did James Cameron find Jesus’ Tomb?
Since James Cameron is a movie director, let’s look at what historians and archeologists tell us rather than what James Cameron tells us. One tell-tale sign from the start is that not one single respected archeologist from the region will support Mr. Cameron’s theory. Not one. And Amos Kloner, who found the original tomb, calls these claims both “impossible” and “nonsense.” Only the writer of the book (that the documentary is based on) named Simcha Jacobovici agrees with Mr. Cameron. Father Jonathan Morris on FoxNews writes what James Cameron should have said:
We really got scared when people like Joe Zias, who spent 25 years as an archeologist at Rockefeller University in Jerusalam, called into question our integrity. I think he said publicly “Simcha has no credibility whatsoever.” And even though the great archeologist, Amos Kloner, tried to rain on our party when he said, “The claim that the burial site has been found is not based on any proof, and is only an attempt to sell.”
But why? What is the evidence that this claim is not true? Let’s start with the claims of the name. From US Today:
The claim rests on a statistical analysis of the inscribed names on the ossuaries in the tomb, which was first uncovered during construction in 1980, and a DNA analysis of the remains in ossuaries inscribed with the names "Jesus son of Joseph" and "Mariamene e Mara." The analysis suggests the two were not blood kin and thus perhaps married.
The statistical analysis set odds of about 600-to-1 that the combination of names on the ossuaries didn't belong to the family of Jesus.
Shimon Gibson of the Albright Institute in Jerusalem, one of the three archaeologists who first explored the "middle-class" tomb, appeared with Cameron at the announcement and pronounced himself "skeptical but open-minded" about the possibility that Jesus' family tomb has been found.
But others were less charitable.
"These were very widespread names at the time, and finding a family tomb with ossuaries inscribed with them proves nothing," says biblical scholar Robert Eisenman of California State University-Long Beach.
Burials show 21% of women in Jesus' era were named Mary, says Richard Bauckham of Scotland's University of St. Andrews.
Jesus, Joseph, Judah and Mara (Martha) were also among the top 10 names.
Several archeologists have also suggested that the names were translated incorrectly, since Hebrew is notoriously difficult to decipher in cases like this. The Wall Street Journal also points out some of the issues:
The "Jesus tomb" explorers trot out statistics on ancient Hebrew names, claiming that the ones in the tomb sound too much like known Jesus family members for the similarity to be a coincidence. But since we've only excavated a minority of archaeological and tomb sites even in Jerusalem, most ancient names are still buried in the earth, making meaningful statistical analysis difficult. What we can say for certain is that most of the names found in the Talpiot tomb on the outskirts of Jerusalem have been seen in many places elsewhere--in texts, on potsherds, in inscriptions, in the Bible itself. They are not rare even by the standards of the limited evidence we do have.
Any good scientific theory must account for all the evidence--in this case, all the names we find in the Talpiot tomb and not just the ones that match the holy-family theory. For instance, we have a Matthew in the tomb, but Jesus had no brothers named Matthew. And where are brothers like Simon, or the sisters mentioned in Mark 6, and where especially is brother James? We actually know that James was buried within sight of the Temple Mount, and Talpiot is miles from there. Eusebius, the fourth-century church historian, saw the tomb and the standing inscribed slab in front of it.
You also have to ask yourself: Why would most of the holy family from Galilee be buried in a middle-class tomb several miles outside of Jerusalem in some sheep pasture? They were, in fact, poor and could not afford an ornamental tomb like this one. This family was from Nazareth, too, with connections in Bethlehem. Why wouldn't its members be buried in one of those places?
We also know that crucifixion was considered the most shameful and hideous way to die, a blow from which one's family honor did not soon recover, if ever. So shamefully did Jesus die that his first followers and even most of his family abandoned him: He was not buried by family members or by the Galilean disciples. He was put in a tomb near the old city that did not belong to any of them.
We live in a day and age that any claim against Christianity, no matter how ridiculous, is taken seriously. James Cameron can make up any stories he likes – he even ignores much of the evidence in this case – and the Discovery channel will run it. Not because it is scientifically valid (since when has the Discovery channel cared about science?), but because James Cameron has the money to widely publish his claims. If we but knew more – as the Wall Street Journal also points out:
In a surreal moment on "Larry King Live" earlier this week, the film's producer, James Cameron (of "Titanic" fame), told us with a straight face that we should all be thankful that we now have tangible evidence that Jesus existed. Actually, no serious historian of biblical antiquity has ever doubted that there was a historical Jesus. Yet it tells us a lot about the state of our culture that Mr. Cameron's remark, backed by pseudo-science, could be seriously made on national television and that the film's companion book has already shot up to No. 5 on Amazon's rankings. We are a Jesus-haunted culture that is so historically illiterate that anything can now pass for knowledge of Jesus.
Our ignorance lines the pockets of those who, like Mr. Cameron, seek fortune over reality.
Is this real? No. Last year we had The Da Vinci Code and this year we have The Tomb of Christ. As long as our populance is so ignorant of history the will be money made with pseudo-science and rewritten history – anything that trieds to contradict Christianity. And why not? After all, materialists can sleep easy if they find that there is no judgment after this world.
God bless,
Jay
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
You claim that this would cause christianity to be dead. I believe these claims should invigorate the faith. I am speaking as a non-christian. I have been so for the fact that it appeared way before these claims that the bible was changed several times to fit political aims. I feel that the main issue we all will face is corruption. This is true of religion, politics, economy and so on. The coruption is deep and to find out that Jesus was just another prophet who might have preached that we are all the children of God could be a great thing. God is God the same.
This gives me hope.
I should probably give up sarcasm for Lent, but today is Sunday...
I heard that they also found a tomb in Mexico with the name "Jesus" on it. My goodness, we should make a movie about the second tomb of Jesus. If one tomb can refute all of Christianity, imagine what two tombs can do?
Posted by: Burnt Marshwiggle at March 3, 2007 09:19 PMMaxwell: Very respectfully, your comment makes no sense. To say that finding a truth to be a lie would "invigorate the faith" is both baseless and rediculous. Would any sports fan love their team more if it was found their championships were bought and not earned? Would a child come closer to their parents after finding out they were adopted? Would we rally around the Jews if the Holocaust were found to be untrue? To all of these there is the obvious (and resounding) NO!
To your second claim, that the "Bible was changed several times to fit political aims"...... who or what is your source? It has been said several times (and documented) that the Bible has been used to "support" political aims, but "changed"?! You would need a copy of the original and a copy of the changed work to make such a claim.... if you have such evidence, it seems wise to support your argument for the benefit of others.
Thirdly, there is quite a difference between "begotten" and "made". I (begotten) do not put myself on the same level as a cabinet my father constructed (made)... nor would I expect the cabinet to feel my equal. In speaking of God as a "Father", Jesus used the example of a human relationship that best describes how we should understand God's love. However, no one at that time (or now) believed that God was their "real" father as opposed to their biological one who had relations with their biological mother.
Since you were "speaking as a non-christian", it would have been nice if a little more logic was applied.
Posted by: Mark Vacha AIA at March 3, 2007 11:31 PMyeah, he(Cameron) can be the king of the world, but not
beyond it
We are all suppose to be intelligent people.If you read Acts, chpt.5 vs.36-39, you will see that Gamaliel stated that if this "new" religion were not of God it would come to naught.He did not specify a time that this would occur. Have you ever wondered why it only took 3 nails and a spear to kill Jesus[God] as you call him.And what a ventriloqist God must have been to be heard from heaven while he hung on a cross. To me God used Jesus to show what happens to the body after death.The spirit automaticaLLY LEAVES THE BODY AND GOES BEFORE God FOR JUDGEMENT.Jesus on the cross told the thief that very night he would be with him in paradice,was that a lie? And why would God put Jesus's spirit back in a dead and decaying body. The people who told those stories did not even know the earth was round.If they had known do you think they would have told the story of Noah and the ark? They would have had to travel to 7 contanents to get 2 of every animal on earth.How long do you think it would have taken Noah to do this?And then he would have run into the eskimos, Indians, Aztex,etc,and that story could not have been told the way it was written. Look at the finding of the smallest homosapien found a year are so ago. I believe it was estimated they were over 5000 yrs old. Older than the story of Noah. We need to use our brains instead of believing all the preachers. After all they make a living selling you their interpretation of the bible.That don't make them right if all they do is repeat the lies we've been told,and are just now finding out the truth.That doesn't mean there isn't a God,just that not everything quoted in that bible was of GOD.Romans chpt 3 vs.4 says as it is written, call all men a liar and only GOD be truth.GOD gives us signs and wonders, is this possibly a sign from him? Worth thinking about!!!!!
Posted by: Linda at March 7, 2007 10:57 PMJay, the Cameron produced "Documentry" was old news from the start. These osuaries(sp?)were found in 1985. They were evaluated and tested by the best and the brightest and found to have no relevance. The director is a genious at finding a story he can manipulate, as he did with the Exodus documentary on the history channel. I found it to be very well done especially when presenting a hypothesis as fact (my reading of him is it is an obvious and intentional attempt at deception which undermines both the Jewish and Christion faiths. Please understand, I do not say this lightly or in anger and I make no claim to infallability. He may very well be an earnest person who believe his own statements or a guy who wants to make a living. I am not judgeing him, I have an opinion. We live in a society that allows everyone to speak and I have no objection to his right to present these views. he presents many valid historical facts, but they also have been studied in the past by experts and rejected as relating to the exodus. I can not figure out Cameron's motivation for banking these well produced but rejected theory's of past years. I think the directer is a hustler who has found a mark. As for the possibility that Christ was not resurrected, IF TRUE (but of course isn't)it would truely create a religious quagmire, as it completely undermines the major tenant of the catholic (and many other faiths). The irony is that as the New Testament was being created (by divinely choosing the books to be be incorporated), many churches celebrated the divinity of Christ WITHOUT the concept the he arose from the dead. In the end it is very possible to appreciate that the transcendance of Crist was proven by his actions, his words and the obvious hand of god in establishing the Church (and it's offshoots). The religious and moral precepts he died for are a true reflection of our creator and it is obvious that it was g_d's intention to create a covanent with another group of people. Isaac Luria, the greatest Jewish Kabbalist (a truely misunderstood man in many circles)says that the creator in no way can be understood as to his motivations. The creator has assisted in the creations of numerous religions and it is not for me to elevate one over the other. If g-d wanted numerous ways to worship him I would be very reticent to make the assumption that he elevates one over the other.I know this goes against Church beliefs, G-d's own hand (on the first set of the ten commandments, which were broken) stated "LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF." Christ's actions in life were alway's tempered with love. On the Passover befor his he was crucified, Christ, possibly the greatest rabbi who ever lived, read the portion of the Hagadda (stories and prayers to be said at the celebration) that instructs how a wise man deals with four children with divergent personalities. Each child is addressed in a manner befitting his need and abilities. This how Christ dealt with the most vile sinners on one hand and to the various apostels he was surrounded by on the other hand. Redemtion is gained through love, love of oneself (in a positive way), love of your neighbor (regardless of faith or belief) and love of g-d. It just may be that "loving one's neighbor" is more important to our Lord then loving him. I for one would not be presumptous enough to comprehend with absolute certainty the mind of the creator. We have been endowed by our creator with the ability to reason and to individually evaluate individuals and their actions both historically and in the present time period. We would not have these abilities if the lord did not wish it to be so. G-d gave man the ability to understand the difference between good and evil. Good help's humanity, evil hurts and destroys it. It is obvious that action must be taken to restore the church to the true teachings of Jesus. I personally do not comprehend how men elevated to positions of leadership and trust can violate the most basic teachings of the Lord. It is obvious that they are not true believers as they have no fear of the Lord's wrath. LET ALL WHO HAVE EYES SEE AND ALL WHO HAVE EARS HEAR THAT THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT IS COMING (I am patiently waiting, the messianic age will happen at exactly the right time. It may come when we least exspect it)I trust that g-d knows what he is doing and I will try to do my part whereever I am. It is for the lord to make final judgement. As for me I will endevor to emulate Jesus by action and thought. Peace be to all.
Posted by: Shelly at March 8, 2007 12:42 AMread the matthew account from the bible about what really happened. after jesus crucifixion how joseph of arimethea who was a secret follower of jesus took his body placed it in his own tomb cut in the rock. after he annointed the body and wrapped it in linens the rock was rolled in front of the opening. the the jewish sect of the pharisees had herod send 2 roman guards place a seal over the tomb and guard it lest according to them the disciples steal the body in the night and the later deception would be worst than the first. there is no way that the roman guards who were armed and trained killers would be overcome. the scripture goes on to reveal there was an earthquake and an angel appeared in plain site of the roman guards and when they saw the angels they fell down as dead men in fear. the stone was rolled away. then jesus appeared to mary as she was crying. later the roman guards explained all the events that had transpired to the religous leaders and they were told to say the disciples stole the body away as they were sleeping. if the religous leaders did this they could have very easily threw some bones in some boxes and place it in the tomb to decieve the community about jesus ressurection. they hated jesus and were envious. read the gospel accounts.the scriptures say that jesus healed the sick, raised the dead and he loves each one of you reading this now. and desires you to know him personally, his love for you, his healing and joy. he desires to give you the gift of eternal life. and fill your life with good things. I have been touched and changed forever by jesus and have been delivered. I love him dearly. jesus said I did not come into the world to condemm the world but to save it. and that the world might have life and more abundantly. he saves us from our sin and the penalty from sin. he took your punishment on his own body. his name yeshua means yaweh will save. yaweh is Gods name. take care all of you!
Posted by: paul at March 10, 2007 07:58 PMAs much as every skeptic wants to disprove Christianity, the only problem with this film is that it isn't a search for truth. What I mean by that is, look at the interview posted on www.donsausa.com -- the director claims "he doesn't have to prove anything", and that his job is to "tell a story" because its a "hot story". Translation: This isn't a search for truth but a search for the almighty dollar!
Posted by: John Yelom at March 20, 2007 01:11 PMFor anyone who do not know. the story of noh ark is true. They had found a boat on the mountain that the bible say it was on. Plus the reason why they never mention others tribs indians etc... is for one reason They did never going out they sent a bird to see dry land and their was. God could also kept them floating where they firsted lift off. God is all powerfull he can keep noah anywhere at any time. OH and the Ot does say the earth is Round. I dont know by heart but it says he rested him self on the cirlce of the earth something.
Posted by: Travis at March 30, 2007 02:10 PMThere is secular as well as biblical writings of a man named Jesus who walked on this earth claiming to be the only Son of God who would take away the sins of the world. There is also secular writings saying this Jesus diad as a criminal on a cross between 2 true criminals.
However, the birth, life and death of Jesus is absolutely meaningless without the bodily reurrection which was predicted 1000 years before. There are no known secular writings to my knowledge which support the claims of his bodily resurrection, nor is there any physical proof that we can put our hands on today. This is exactly why FAITH (a gift From God) is needed in order to believe what the word of God tells us. God loves us and hates sin, therefore a Holy God prepared for us a perfect sacrifice (Jesus Christ) so that we could be reconciled back to him. God himself raised the literal body Jesus after 3 days in order to confirm to all that Jesus was exactly who he claimed he was! You may not be able to prove all of the claims of the bible, but no claims have ever been disproven. If you wait for physical proof of a risen Saviour, you will have waited to long. Please, for your own sake, ask God to give you the faith to believe in Jesus Christ without any tangible proof.
May God grant us all the faith so that our sins will be forgiven! What other hope do we have?
Dan,
Many Protestants have argued quite convincingly that there is more historical evidence supporting the Resurrection of Our Lord than there is to support the conquests of Napoleon, William of Orange, and Genghis Khan.
We accept as fact historical details on the life of Confucius, Buddha, Mohammed, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Copernicus, Newton, and Galileo. By the same token, we should accept the evidence about the life of Jesus Christ.
Posted by: Burnt Marshwiggle at April 9, 2007 11:31 AMFinding a tomb of Jesus Christ is this possible i believe yes Jesus was a man like all of us a great man who was clearly close to god but never the less a man. i do believe in god but do not believe in the church, the church is a man made insitution jesus is believed to have said that you only need to look within yourself to find god and not in a building just look around you for proof of god
Posted by: Kelvin at May 11, 2007 04:32 PMIt makes absolutely no sense to say that Jesus Christ was just a prophet. So then you would be saying that He was teaching and spreading lies, calling Himself the Son of God and the Messiah. He would have been one big liar. Now, would that be a prophet of God? Nope. He WAS and IS the Son of God, not just a prophet.
Posted by: Kristi at May 22, 2007 05:23 PMI don't and I won't believe that the tomb they found was that of the true one an only JESUS
Posted by: Neal Rogers at August 13, 2007 11:36 AM
