Academy Award winning director James Cameron and Emmy Award winning investigative journalist Simcha Jacobovici have joined forces and produced a documentary film claiming to have identified the tomb and physical remains of Jesus of Nazareth. The show is entitled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” and it airs on March 4, 2007 on the Discovery channel.
If true, Christianity as we know it is doomed. In 1 Corinthians 15:14-15 the apostle Paul (who claims to be an eye-witness of Jesus’ resurrection) says, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ.”
In short, the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the central pillar of proof put forward by the New Testament authors to substantiate Jesus’ claims to deity and the forgiveness of sins offered to humanity through Jesus shed blood on the cross. The Apostle Paul argues that If Jesus didn’t bodily rise from the dead then Christianity is a FALSE religion and should not be followed or observed.
The important question that needs to be answered is “Did Cameron and Simcha find Jesus’ remains, or is their case as ‘unsinkable’ as the Titanic?”
Although the film hasn’t aired, there is enough ‘evidence’ posted on the internet already to begin drawing conclusions.
Here is what we know so far.
In 1980 a tomb was discovered in Talpiot inside of modern Jerusalem that contained 10 stone ossuaries (bone boxes). Six of the ossuaries had names carved on them identifying the occupants.
The names are as follows.
1. Jesus son of Joseph
2. Mary - Written in Aramaic
3. Mary - Written in Greek as Mariamne
4. Jose - a ‘rare’ nickname for Joseph
5. Matthew
6. Judah son of Jesus
At first glance these names have a striking similarity to the names of people from the New Testatment. Although critics are already pointing out the fact that these names were very common names for people who lived in and around the holy land during the 1st century, Simcha and Cameron’s documentary uses DNA evidence and statistical analysis in order to draw the conclusion that this is Jesus’ family tomb. They claim that the odds of it not being Jesus' tomb are HIGHLY improbable. Click Here to Watch Simcha’s ‘Football Field’ Analogy.
Taken at face value Simcha and Cameron appear to have built a rock solid case against Christianity. However, if you spend even a little time critically analyzing their claims then you realize that Cameron and Simcha have done nothing more than build a Da Vinci Code like house of cards that crumbles as soon as you blow on it.
Faulty Assumptions and Alternative Histories
The film’s statistical analysis is its strongest proof for the Talpiot Tomb being Jesus' family tomb . HOWEVER, in order for their statistical interpretation of this evidence to be true we must assume five things about the occupants of the tomb. These assumptions in some cases require us rewrite history or subscribe to an 'alternate history'. Here are the five 'alternate history assumptions' that must be true in order for the film's statistical analysis to have any weight or merit.
1. We must assume that the Jesus and Jose of this tomb are brothers.
Why? Because if they are not brothers then the statistical chance of this tomb being THE tomb of Jesus of Nazareth becomes VERY low.
2. We must assume that Mariamne is Mary Magdalene.
The statistical case for the Talpiot tomb being Jesus' family tomb almost totaly hinges on this assumption.
The evidence put forth by the filmmakers to support this assumption is a 4th Century Gnostic text entitled “The Acts of Philip”.
But as you will see later in this article there is absolutely no chance that the Mariamne in the Talpiot tomb is Mary Magdalene.
Not only is the Acts of Philip a non-credible source for supporting their claim. The film's producers actually ignore one of their own expert's findings regarding the name inscribed on Mariamne's ossuary.
3. We must also assume that Jesus of Nazareth was married to Mariamne and together they had a son named Judah.
Again there are no credible 1st Century documents that support this assumption. This assumption is more akin to the Da Vinci Code than sound historical and archaeological scholarship.
4. We must assume that the Matthew found in this tomb was somehow related to Jesus’ mother but is NOT her son.
We have no documentary evidence of a Matthew in Jesus’ family. Therefore, the filmmakers have to find a way to ‘explain him away’. His presence in the Talpiot tomb messes up their theory that this is Jesus’ family tomb. So they had to fabricate a theory that would explain his presence. The filmmakers also have to explain why certain people are missing from the tomb. This leads to the next assumption.
5. We have to assume that the James ossuary originated from this tomb even though there is no solid evidence that links it to this site.
This is critical because if this tomb is Jesus’ family tomb, then three of Jesus’ brothers are inexplicably missing from this site. They are James, Judas and Simon. The filmmakers go out of their way to attempt to prove that the James ossuary belongs to this tomb because that reduces the number of missing brothers to only Judas and Simon. Click here for more information on the James ossuary.
>>Adendum: In order for the James ossuary to be part of the Talpiot Tomb it cannot have been unearthed prior to March of 1980. That is when the Talpiot Tomb was discovered. New evidence and testimony submitted in the Antiquities Fraud Trial of Oded Golan, the owner of the James Ossuary shows that the ossuary was photographed in the 1970s. The Toronto Star reported today...
"Former FBI agent Gerald Richard testified that a photo of the James ossuary, showing it in Golan's home, was taken in the 1970s, based on tests done by the FBI photo lab. The trial resumes tomorrow.Jacobovici conceded in an interview that if the ossuary was photographed in the 1970s, it could not then have been found in a tomb in 1980."
The end result of all of these assumptions is the family tree/tomb inhabitants chart shown below.
This chart is taken from the films official discovery channel website. Please notice that this chart is still unsure as to how Matthew and Mariamne are related to the other inhabitants of the tomb. The reasons for this uncertainty is twofold. First, the presence of Matthew and Miriamne do not fit the written records of Jesus' family. The second is a direct result of the DNA evidence collected by the filmmakers.
One would expect that since the filmmakers make a point of mentioning DNA evidence that they’d be able to use that evidence to support their assumptions. But they don’t. The official Discovery Channel site says this, “By studying the DNA bone fragments and residue from ossuaries, scientists may be able to determine familial relationships between the various people buried in an ancient tomb. In the case of the Talpiot tombs, researchers were able to extract usable tissue samples from only two of the ossuaries - the “Mariamne” and “Yeshua bar Joseph” boxes. Those two samples were sent to the Paleo-DNA Laboratory at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ontario, a facility that specializes in analyzing ancient remains.. The lab was able to recover mitochondrial DNA from the samples and determined that the two individuals were not maternally related. According to the lab’s Dr. Carney Matheson, because the two sets of remains were found in what is suspected to be a familial tomb, the two people “would most likely be husband and wife.”
In other words, the ONLY THING the DNA evidence proves is that the Jesus and Mariamne found in this tomb are not maternally related. The film's producers argue that this proves that Mariamne was married to Jesus. But, it is entirely possible that she could have been the wife of Jose, Judah or even Matthew.
Why There is Absolutely NO Chance that Mariamne is Mary Magdalene.
In order to make the claim that Mariamne is Mary Magdalene the film’s producers have literally had to manufacture evidence and ignore practically every established rule that relates to historical evidence and primary source documents.
The ONLY way the film’s producers could build their case is by setting aside the eye-witness testimony of the New Testament Gospels which never once refer to Mary Magdalne as Mariamne. They instead favor an obscure 4th century gnostic document called the Acts of Philip in order to make their claim that Mary Magdalene and the Mariamne of the Talpiot Tomb are one in the same.
By doing this, the film’s producers are literally expecting us to believe that a document written nearly 300 years after Jesus and Mary Magdalene walked the Earth is MORE credible and MORE accurate than the New Testament documents which were written by eye-witnesses VERY shortly after the events they record.
This is absurd!
Furthermore, if you actually take the time to read the Acts of Philip you will notice some very funny things.
The first thing you'll notice is that the book itself very fanciful.
The book’s narrative claims that Jesus sent out a group of followers to spread his message. The followers were Philip, Bartholomew, and a woman named Mariamne who is identified as Philip's sister. Among their accomplishments was the conversion of a talking leopard, a talking goat, and the slaying of a dragon.
Yes, that is right Bartholomew, Philip and Mariamne went out preaching Jesus’ message to talking leopard’s and talking goats!
Secondly, the Acts of Philip NEVER even ONCE refers to Mariamne as Mary Magdalene. Granted, some scholars speculate that Mariamne COULD be Mary Magdalene BUT the text never actually says that. Therefore, the film’s producers are literally overstating the evidence supplied to us in the Acts of Philip.
Furthermore, the film’s producers contradict their own expert L.Y. Rahmani when they claim that the inscription on Mariamne’s ossuary says “Mary the Master”.
According to the film’s own evidentiary documents which are available for download from the Discovery.com website, the name on Mariamne’s ossuary literally reads “of Mariamne who is (also called) Mara (Mara is a contraction of the name Martha)” Click Here to download the document yourself and read the second page of the Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries by L.Y. Rahmani. In the notes you will see what the film’s own expert says that ossuary says.
One last point, the film claims that "Maraimne e Mara" means Mary the Master. But the only way they could make this claim is if they mix languages. Mara means master in Aramaic, but the ossuary incription is written in Greek. In order for the film makers to be correct abou the ossuary text reading “Mary the Master” we have to believe that the inscription although written in greek is supposed to be understood as being half greek and half Aramaic. This is preposterous. Since the inscription is in Greek, if it was supposed to say "Mary the Master" it would have to say "Mariamne Ho Kurios" NOT "Mariamne e Mara".
No matter how you slice it, the fact remains that there is no possible way to link Mary Magdalene and Mariamne e Mara from the Talpiot tomb.
The film’s producers are either being naive or intellectually dishonest by claiming that they are one in the same person.
The Cards Come Crumbling Down
Another linch pin in Cameron’s and Simcha’s statistical analysis is the assumption that Jose is the brother of Jesus. If the Jose of the Talpiot Tomb is Jesus' brother then the statistical case for this tomb being the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth is much stronger. If Jose is not Jesus' brother then their statistical case case begins to crumble.
This leads us to ask an important question... Why should we believe that the Jose found in this tomb is the brother of Jesus?
Answer: We shouldn’t!
The evidentiary documents provided by the filmmakers themselves say that Jose is Joseph and that he is most likely the father of Jesus and the grandfather of Judah. This is not my speculation, this is the testimony L.Y. Rahmani who is one of the film's own experts .
Here is what L.Y. Rahami said, “The similarity of this ossuary and its inscription with that of Marya... both from the same tomb, may indicate that these are the ossuaries of the parents of Yeshua and the grand parents of Yehuda.”
Below I am reproducing a screen shot taken from the documents provided by the filmmakers. Click Here to download the document for yourself.
Fact: the evidence provided by the filmmakers themselves lead us to conclude that Jose (Joseph) of the Talpiot tomb is the father of Jesus NOT his brother. As you will see later, this will have a profoundly negative impact on the film’s statistical analysis.
With this evidence in mind, below you will find a more plausible reconstruction of the family tree of the Talpiot Tomb’s inhabitants. Notice that this family looks a lot different than the family of Jesus of Nazareth.
Not only is this a more plausible reconstruction of the family tree for the inhabitants of the Talpiot Tomb, it PERFECTLY fits the evidence that the tomb itself presents us as well as the expert opinion of L.Y. Rahmani.
In this reconstruction, Joseph, whose nickname is Jose is present in the tomb along with his wife, two of his sons, Jesus and Matthew, his daughter-in-law Mariamne and his grandson Judah.
This family tree does not require us to account for missing brothers and sisters, stolen ossuaries, marriages that were not supposed to have taken place, throw out eye-witness documentary evidence, believe in the Easter Bunny or find a way to explain away people like Matthew who ‘aren’t even supposed to be in that tomb.”
This is clearly not the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth. Instead it is most likely the tomb of a middle-class or wealthy 1st Century family from Jerusalem. (Which is what scholars have been saying this tomb is since 1980.)
In short, Simcha and Cameron are engaging in the archaeological equivalent of ‘identity theft’ by trying to force the evidence into proving that this is the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth.
Although Jesus of Nazareth had a father named Joseph, he did not have a brother named Matthew, nor was he married, nor did he have a son. If we had found Jesus’ family tomb we would have found his brothers James, Jose, Simon and Judas along with his father Joseph and his mother Mary. The reason James, Simon and Judas are missing is quite simple, they are not buried there because this is not their family’s tomb.
The Statical Analysis Falls Apart
The film's statistical underpinnings also collapse as soon as you properly consider the tomb’s evidence.
The film claims that the probability of the Talpiot Tomb being Jesus’ family tomb is 600 to 1 or 599 times out of 600 it would be Jesus’ Family tomb.
The way they came up with that figure is by determining a probability for each of the names mentioned in the tomb then multiplying those probabilites by each other then adjusting the figure for unintentional biases and all possible first century tombs.
Since neither Matthew nor Judah were ‘explicatively’ mentioned in the Gospels they did not use their probabilities in the statistical analysis.
Here are the probabilities that the filmmakeres came up with for each person found in the tomb.
1. Jesus Son of Joseph - 1 in 190
2. Maria - 1 in 4
3. Mariamne - 1 in 160
4. Jose - 1 in 20
The combined 'raw' probability of all of these people appearing in the same tomb is 1 in 2,400,000.
They then divided 2,400,000 by 4 to adjust for unintentional historical biases and were left with 1 in 600,000.
They then divided 600,000 by 1,000 to adjust for all possible first Century Jerusalem Tombs.
Their final figure was 600 to 1 in favor of it being Jesus Tomb.
Sounds convincing doesn't it?
Yet, notice that they removed Matthew and Judah because they were not ‘explicatively’ mentioned in the gospels. Yet, they are keeping Mariamne in their formula despite the fact that she is also NOT ‘explicatively’ mentioned in the gospels. This is the equivalent of ‘cooking the books’ with bogus data.
Since I've already shown that there is absolutely no way to equate Mary Magdalene with Mariamne we can remove Mariamne from the statistical equation.
Let’s see how that affects the results.
Once Mariamne is taken from the equation the raw statistical computation falls to 1 in 15,200
After adjusting for unintentional biases and all possible First Century Jerusalem Tombs the probability of the Talpiot Tomb being Jesus’ family tomb is only to 3.8 to 1.
When you consider that Jose is probably Jesus' father Joseph, then we realize that he is already accounted for in the formula for Jesus. Remember that the probability of 1 in 190 was for Jesus son of Joseph. If we were just accounting for Jesus then then the formula would only be 1 in 8. Therefore, Joseph should not be counted twice in this equation. When you change the equation accordingly and adjust it for biases, the statistical chance that the Talpiot Tomb is the THE tomb of Jesus of Nazareth falls even further to ONLY .19 to 1. In other words, there is a greater chance that the Talpiot tomb ISN'T the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth than it is.
Simply put, the REAL statistical probability that this is the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth is so slim as to be thoroughly unconvincing. There is a better chance that Hilary Clinton will join the Republican party than this grave site being the actual tomb of Jesus Christ.
These more accurate figues also show us that statistics are only as good as the assumptions that you are operating with. Faulty or biased assumptions can skew and distort statistical results so badly that those results can be misleading or untrue. This is why Mark Twain reminds us that there are three types of untruths: "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics".
The Statistical Probability that All Five of Film’s "Alternate History Assumptions" are True
Now it is time to have some fun.
Since Simcha and Cameron are defending the film’s conclusions based upon its statistical ‘soundness’, let's test their assumptions using their same statistical methods.
Assumption 1 - That the Jesus and Jose of the Talpiot Tomb are brothers. 1 in 3 chance they are brothers.
Assumption 2 - That Mariamne in the Talpiot Tomb is the Mary Magdalene of the New Testament Gospels. 1 in 1000 chance she is.
Assumption 3 - That Jesus of Nazareth was married to the Mariamne of the Talpiot Tomb. 1 in 1000 chance that he was.
Assumption 4 - The Matthew found in the Talpiot Tomb is related to Mary but is NOT her son. 1 in 10 chance that he is.
Assumption 5 - The James Ossuary is originally from the Talpiot Tomb. 1 in 2 chance that it is.
When we calculate the statistical probability that all five of these "alternate history assumptions" are true the raw score is a 1 in 60,000,000 chance that all five are true.
When we adjust the probability for unintentional historical biases and all possible first century Jerusalem tombs we are still left with a 1 in 15,000 chance that all five of the films assumptions are true. In other words, 14999 times out of 15,000 Simcha’s and Cameron’s assumptions regarding the alternate history that is necessary to conclude that the Talpiot Tomb is that of Jesus Christ will be false.
The Bottom Line
A careful analysis of the facts proves that Simcha and Cameron have NOT found the 'lost tomb' of Jesus of Nazareth. Their 'evidence' is far from conclusive and their statistical analysis is mired by faulty assumptions and bad scholarship. Simcha and Cameron’s efforts, although they make for provocative television do not even meet the minimum standards of evidence necessary to overturn the Biblical record.
Contrary to what Simcha, Cameron and their liberal theologians would have you believe, the evidence for Jesus' bodily resurrection from the dead as laid out by the eye-witness testimony of the New Testament documents still stands.
--- Update February 28, 2007 - 10th Ossuary Was NEVER Missing.
The case against the Cameron’s and Simcha’s claims is picking up even more steam and I’ve had to adjust the probability of the the James Ossuary belonging to the Talpiot Tomb.
The film is claiming that the James Ossuary more than likely originated from the Talpiot Tomb because one of the 10 original ossuaries disappeared and is missing. According to Simcha the James Ossuary first surfaced in 1980, therefore it must be the missing Talpiot ossuary.
Yesterday, the Jerusalem Post published an interview with Prof. Amos Kloner. He is the man who oversaw the archeological work at the Talpiot Tomb in 1980. He was asked directly about the “missing ossuary” and the chances that the James Ossuary originated from Talpiot. Kloner told the Jerusalem post that there NEVER was a missing ossuary and that the JAMES ossuary does not fit the dimensions of the ossuary in question.
Here is the quote from the Jerusalem Post...
What of the assertion that the 10th ossuary disappeared from your care and may be none other than the "James" ossuary?Nothing has disappeared. The 10th ossuary was on my list. The measurements were not the same (as the James ossuary). It was plain (without an inscription). We had no room under our roofs for all the ossuaries, so unmarked ones were sometimes kept in the courtyard (of the Rockefeller Museum).
As a result of this new information we could justify raising the probality of Assumption 5 from 1 in 2 to a higher figure such as 1 in 10 or even 1 in 100.
If we go with the more conservative figure of 1 in 10 this raises the probability that all five of the films alternate histories is true to 1 in 75,000.
"The names are as follows.
1. Jesus son of Joseph
2. Mary - Written in Aramaic
3. Mary - Written in Greek as Mariamne
4. Jose - a ‘rare’ nickname for Joseph
5. Matthew
6. Judah son of Jesus"
Actually, other news articles say the name Cameron is rendering as "Jesus" is actually "Jesua" or possibly even "Hanun". So you shouldn't even argue from the position that the name is "Jesus" since even that is suspect.
c.f.: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/26/D8NHFDRG3.html
Posted by: Jay | February 26, 2007 at 06:24 PM
"Although Jesus of Nazareth had a father named Joseph, he did not have a brother named Matthew, nor was he married, nor did he have a son. If we had found Jesus’ family tomb we would have found his brothers James, Jose, Simon and Judas along with his father Joseph and his mother Mary."
And most glaringly of all, there wouldn't be a "Jesus" casket in the tomb if it were the family crypt of Jesus of Nazareth, as He rose from the dead and bodily ascended into heaven. They'll have found his family's tomb when they find one with just his parents' and his brothers' caskets. =)
Posted by: Jay | February 26, 2007 at 06:33 PM
Chris,
Let me commend you for some excellent work here. Thank you for doing this.
Posted by: Pastor Ken Silva | February 26, 2007 at 11:23 PM
Chris,
Well done. Of course the enemies of Christianity, those who hate the real Jesus, will jump all over this fallacy and say our faith is false. However, our faith is made of more solid stuff than their false evidence. Perhaps many fence riders will fall away due to this, but not a real believer.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
Posted by: Mike Ratliff | February 27, 2007 at 09:33 AM
This jesus tomb thing deeply worries me! I hope it's not true.
Posted by: dh | February 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM
There is a nice story in the gospel of Matthew (28:11-15) about rumours of Jesus body being stolen from the tomb. The gospel says: “this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day”. The gospel of Matthew has been written around 70 AD. Why should people have circulated the story, if nearby there was a tomb with the remains of Jesus, his wife and his son?
Posted by: mario rossi | February 27, 2007 at 10:44 AM
In agreement with all above, the Word of God, which has been around for centuries, is what we rely on. Perhaps this could be a separating of the "wheat from the tares". God bless
Posted by: Frank Grubb | February 27, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Thank you for this analysis of the movie. I am unsuprised to see this coming from Hollywood, but nonetheless, It makes me upset to see such glaring fabrications and biased presentation of information as "fact", and to know that so many people will watch this "documentary" and will never see the other side of the coin as you have presented here.
Posted by: Claudio | February 27, 2007 at 02:31 PM
I am afraid that you are wrong this time. Liberal Christians such as myself have endeavored to educate "Christians" who have not had the opportunity to receive a liberal education.
We were right.
Posted by: Liberal Christian | February 27, 2007 at 02:43 PM
Hey there, great work here. I really enjoyed reading this analysis.
Perhaps what came immediately to my attention about this false "tomb" is that they based their "facts" off of non-credible Gnostic text sources. Not only did these Gnostic texts come 200 years after the fact, but they originated outside of the Church, meaning that it has about the credibility of the boy next door who believes he came up with a diagram of a space ship. It never originated with the Apostles, and it's glaring contradictions means that one source must be right, and one source must be wrong. 64 books in complete unison and harmony contradict the many books of the Gnostic texts, all which contradict themselves enough to make a Sieve laugh.
Of course, to the liberals who which to disprove Orthodox Christianity, the only reason why these Gnostic texts are considered "Credible" is because: 1) The Gnostic Texts contradict Traditional Christianity. 2) The liberals contradict Traditional Christianity. 3) Therefore the liberals validate the Gnostic Texts as facts, despite the fact that the Apostolic Church denied the books ever from coming from the Church to begin with.
Finally, I really enjoyed reading this entry. Sadly, many Christians who are uneducated in Historical Christianity (and not the liberal fabrications) will fall for this. Think of it as the next Da-Vinci Code, if you will. I'd recommend we as True Christians do all we can to help the sheep who may stray.
Currently I am registered as "Wolter" at the Jesusfamilytomb website. I stopped in to defend True Christianity. I'd hope everyone will be encouraged to do the same; fill the boards with Truth and defend Traditional Christianity.
God Bless you,
- Calvin
An Apologist
Posted by: True, Conservative Christian | February 27, 2007 at 03:01 PM
Thank you for the indepth information regarding this "movie." Those who want to believe a lie, will; and those who will believe the truth will! The time of Christ's return is drawing closer and closer.
Posted by: Fannie Johnson | February 27, 2007 at 06:14 PM
Great Piece disputing the so called Jesus Tomb, everything you said is right on with what other arciologists are saying. Another Point to add is that why would a low class Carpenter buy a family tomb, which are for the middle to wealthy class, in a town which he is a foreigner to. Joesph wouldn't have bought a tomb in that area. I mean I would go 100 miles away to a foreign place which i have no ties to, to buy a family burial site. And I don't think Joesph would either.
Posted by: Jon Hooton | February 27, 2007 at 07:36 PM
True christianity is oxymoronic insanity to a liberal christian. If we as mortal beings, "have" to believe the Scripture, then those who keep rewriting, reinterpreting, bibles(calling it scripture) for others to be devoured by, label those of us who believe GOD preserves His word, onlyism fanatics. And recently I was accused of being a danger to the Body of Christ, because I pointed out that all modern versions of the bible rely partly on the Alexandrian texts, which are the gnostic manuscripts found only in Egypt. Same gnostic religion that gave us the later gnostic books of Mary, Thomas,ect. . Gnostics in a nutshell, play whisper down the lane. They claim "to know" and that is the definition of gnosis. You can be sure there will be claims of biblical proof supporting this "new" find. Then another interpretation of another gospel. In so much confusion and arquing about things so removed from GOD, we become removed from GOD. GOD and His word are not attractive to this world. And we arrogantly think we are right to change that because "it sounds good to our ears". And that presented this way or that will endear our children to believe in GOD. GOD will not conform to us. And I'm glad to know that. I trust GOD's many ways of reaching those who are truly just misled but not hardhearted. GOD's many ways, NOT ours. But it doesn't take away the saddness I feel for those who support man-made ideals to their own destruction. Chris, you had great insight on this "folly find".
Posted by: lc | February 28, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Thank YOU! thank you! This is what ive been looking for since i first heard of camerons movie.I knew it wasnt true, but I needed to see it exposed like you did."Praise the Lord"
Posted by: paul | February 28, 2007 at 03:37 PM
Thank you for the comment. You do a more comprehensive job of deconstructing this little charade than I. For a tomb to have been discovered in 1980 and only now to excite? It is shades of the James ossuary and Oded going 'I had no interest in early Christianity' to explain why this ossuary say on his shelf since allegedly 1976.
Posted by: Anna puna | February 28, 2007 at 06:52 PM
That fellow that said we haven't had a good liberal education is something we can all thank God about.
Posted by: David Norris | February 28, 2007 at 07:32 PM
Nicely presented!
Apparently the case for Assumption #2 is even more tenous than you state. The inscription appears to be "Mariamnou" or "of Mary" rather than "Mariamne." Plus "Mara" is more easily translated "Martha" than "Master." If these are both true then it seems that the ossuary contained the bones of two women, Mary and Martha. Possibly mother and child (as supposed for the ossuary of Simon and Alexander of Cyrene).
Evidently the Acts of Phillip never identifies Phillip's sister Mariamne as Mary Magdalene. Apparently this association was a speculation made by someone who studied the text and was attempting to connect this Mariamne with a person mentioned in the Gospels.
So the Mariemne=Mary Magdalene case is extremely weak.
Posted by: Phil | February 28, 2007 at 07:44 PM
thanks chris, I've linked to you on my talpiot tomb page here. blessings
Posted by: stephen shields | February 28, 2007 at 07:46 PM
Wow! What a great, in-depth post. I wish mine had been so thorough after reading this one.
Posted by: Missy | February 28, 2007 at 09:59 PM
I don't care about the theology of the mess, am not a big fan of religion and, frankly, all the hullabaloo of the "discovery" bores me.
But I heard this from a professor of theology, and believe it to be true: if this find was really all it's cracked up to be, it would have been thoroughly researched and put through the paces in academic journals and peer-reviewed.
Instead, the announcement was made in a press conference.
That should tell you, believer or not, all you need to know about the validity of these claims.
Posted by: Newspaper Hack | March 01, 2007 at 12:58 AM
For the record, the identification of Mariamne as MM comes from The Apocryphal Acts of Philip. The identification was made by Francois Bovon who estimated that the work was 5th century. The Gnostic Gospel of Philip does not to my memory mention Mariamne. In the Actos of Philip, Mariamne has a sister known as Martha, and is the sister to Philip. They appear to be the Mary and Martha of Bethany. One commentator noted that Mariamne seemed to be a composite Mary of all the women of that name in the Gospels. Philip also appears to be a composite of the deacon in Acts 6-8 and the Philip of Hieropolis. Amazing what 4 centuries do to memory!
Posted by: Peter Nathan | March 01, 2007 at 01:02 AM
This is excellent. Thanks so much.
Posted by: Pam | March 01, 2007 at 01:29 AM
In any case, the odds are as good as the likelihood that the people in charge of the testaments for 2000 years never massaged the evidence.
Posted by: BIll | March 01, 2007 at 06:28 AM
Thanks Chris. Excellent work! I posted on my website
Posted by: Jim Peet | March 01, 2007 at 08:04 AM
Chris,
Thanks for the link on the kpwf page. Your analysis was well made.
The lies keep mounting up, as people try to reduce Jesus to merely human. It hasn't worked for 2000 years, and it won't ever work either.
Posted by: zimblymallu | March 01, 2007 at 08:48 AM
Wonderful post, Chris. Excellent research and presentation. Thanks for your comment on my blog pointing me here. I'll try to point some others here as well.
Posted by: Kyle | March 01, 2007 at 10:20 AM
As a side note, for Catholics this is a no-brainer. Jesus resurrected and ascended into heaven; Mary the Mother of Jesus died and was assumed into heaven leaving no bones behind in any tomb.... rather like Enoch in Genesis and Elijah on a "chariot of fire." It is also said that Moses was assumed after his death to prevent misguided worship to him (note that both Elijah and Moses both appeared to Jesus at the mount of configuration).
Not only this, Jesus had no brothers or sisters in the immediate sense (http://www.catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp) (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/3975/breth.htm). In fact, aside from vague references to "brothers" you can't find anything on brothers or sisters in his childhood, when he was left behind at the temple, etc., etc. that would point to literal siblings. Slightly off topic, I know, but when a Catholic hears that this "documedrama" suggests Jesus was buried with his "father" (also no references to Joseph after Jesus in the temple at approximately 12) and brothers (let alone wife and kid), it is ridiculous.
In fact, Joseph the ancestral home of Joseph was Bethlehem, and his adult home was Nazareth, and assuming he died years before Christ, it doesn't make sense that Joseph would be buried in Jerusalem. Why would he have a tomb there? Jesus was buried alone in a tomb outside Jerusalem but all accounts historical and eyewitnesses report the tomb being empty.
This stupid "documentary" is ridiculous. There are so many Mary's and Jesus' buried in Jerusalem.... this is an attempt, whether they intend to or not (perhaps something more sinister is behind their motivations that these filmmakers don't even recognize) to undermine basic Christian doctrine. We don't need to fear it; we've lasted 2000 years and historically grow in number and faith with persecution.
Posted by: Amy P | March 01, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Isn't it amazing the leaps of faith people will take with something new that won't be remembered even 200 years from now, let alone 2000, when the evidence for Jesus' resurrection, while taking faith to believe in, has withstood the tests of time, tradition, doubt, attack, and millions of changed lives.
Posted by: bryan riley | March 01, 2007 at 12:06 PM
What's incredibly interesting is how James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici didn't do any research into the time period that this supposedly discovered tomb of Jesus was created in. The fact that the box they claim contains Jesus's bones even says "Jesus son of Joseph" is blatant proof that it isn't Christ, and here's why.
In the time of Jesus, adultery was looked upon very differently than it is now. When Mary, who was not married, all of a sudden shows up back in her hometown pregnant, everyone is going to come to one conclusion - she had an adulterous affair and the child was an illigitimate child. Mary would have been labeled as a whore and impure and Jesus would have been viewed as a bastard child. (Please understand, I am not using that term as a license to swear nor am I intending to be offensive, so please no one read into this statement.)
Here's why this is important. In those times, because Jesus was viewed as being fatherless, he was referred to as "Jesus, son of Mary." (If you read the New Testament accounts of his hometown's reaction to him in older translations, you will see that he is even referred to as this. Some newer translations change it to say "Jesus, Son of Joseph," which removes the meaning and the context). A person in those days was always known by their name and their father's name. It was your social status, basically.
Provided Christ was even buried in a box (which there is no proof or mention of AT ALL in ANY translation of scriptures), he would have been labeled as "Jesus, son of Mary" because that was his referrence. Some would probably try to use this for the ammunition of the lie that the disciples came and stole his body, but even then the same argument applies. If the disciples HAD stolen his bones, THEY would have even labeled this supposed box with the name "Jesus, son of Mary."
Posted by: Cameron T. | March 01, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I don't think you intended to say Paul claimed to be a witness to the actual resurrection of Jesus Christ. If he had been, would he have gone from there and persecuted Christians?
Bill Hohmann
Sabbatarian heretic
Posted by: Bill Hohmann | March 01, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Bill,
Actually Paul is an eye-witness to the resurrection. He had ‘run in’ with risen Jesus on the road to Damascus. That is why he became a Christian. It is also why he refers to himself as an apostle who was abnormally born.
Posted by: Val | March 01, 2007 at 01:03 PM
I found your link on magdalenemystique.com. Thanks for letting us know about your site. You have some great information.
Sheryl
Posted by: Sheryl | March 01, 2007 at 01:45 PM
The refutation here seems pretty convincing, and explains some of the reasons that those associated with the tomb itself have long been skeptical of claims about this tomb such as those made by James Cameron.
Still, the existence of this tomb wouldn't contradict the resurrection, would it? It would seem only to contradict the claim that Christ ascended bodily into heaven (and strictly speaking, it doesn't even contradict that, since he could always have come back).
Personally I'm an agnostic and therefore receptive to the claim that Jesus simply managed to survive the Crucifixion. Nevertheless, Cameron's claim to have found his tomb seems wildly speculative at best.
I can understand the idea that Jesus and his associates might have moved away from the area in which he was crucified; however the idea he and his religious followers would have later been buried in a tomb entirely devoid of any reference to his religious teachings certainly seems to strain credulity. And the inscriptions on the ossuary of "Jesus" are so crude as to call into question the idea that this person was held in any remarkable esteem at the time of his burial.
Personally, I think that Christianity might benefit from discounting the "miraculous" events described in the bible, and focusing on the quality of its moral teaching without all the supernaturalism, and I would encourage Christians to consider whether or not Christianity would remain compelling as a human creation (I think it would). But while Cameron's theory is interesting and perhaps beneficial to consider, I must admit that this "discovery" provides little factual challenge to traditional Christian belief. (On the other hand, who knows what they'll dig up tomorrow!)
In any case, thanks to Chris Rosebrough for taking the time to straighten out some matters of fact in this case.
Posted by: Washburn | March 01, 2007 at 02:04 PM
well done...thanks for your work.
Posted by: Pete Williamson | March 01, 2007 at 02:08 PM
Chris, good job, thanks for alerting me to it on my blog. In a way, it's a shame people like you must devote the time and effort necessary to debunking such twaddle, satisfying though it is to read. The vehemence and tenacity of Cameron and his ilk to disprove the resurrection is such we must be grateful you and others are willing, by the use of reason and logic, to reveal so splendidly what absolute b.s. artists they really are.
Posted by: The Bovina Bloviator | March 01, 2007 at 04:22 PM
Excellent post. Glad you have the time to go through all this info.
Posted by: John Kaiser | March 01, 2007 at 04:50 PM
Well, I already had decided this was a hoax. ;) But, I do like your analysis.
What's sad is how many people will swallow this whole just because they perceive it as giving the church a black eye...
Posted by: David N. Scott | March 01, 2007 at 05:56 PM
This documentary about the ossuary of Jesus is a fabrication that leaves bible skeptics again frustrated as mere speculation and conjecture impresses them more than hard scientific evidence.
Posted by: Hilton Harrell, Jr | March 01, 2007 at 06:48 PM
Great analysis, good job!!
May I translate your article into Indonesian language, widespread it, and post it in my blog and site?
Posted by: welly mainollo | March 02, 2007 at 02:12 AM
Excellent post. This is exactly what we need; good, sober analysis without all the media hype.
Posted by: Ross | March 02, 2007 at 06:29 AM
Thanks for the solid post. You may also find this helpful: http://blog.pastorresources.com/.
Phil
Posted by: Philip Gons | March 02, 2007 at 12:12 PM
great critique, thanks for saving me the time! A good friend of mine has also addressed this latest anti-Christian hollywood bologna:
http://www.michaelbrazellmurray.com/wordpress/?p=264
between the two I no longer feel obligated to address it myself and can move on to other thought projects :)
Posted by: Theophilus | March 02, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Thanks for your comment on my site: http://pastortomsims.com.
I have openned a discussion on the Christian Fellowship Forum ( http://christianfellowshipforum.com ) The discussion link is http://community.compuserve.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?webtag=ws-fellowship&nav=messages&tid=116809&tsn= You and your readers would be welcome to participate.
Posted by: Pastor Tom Sims | March 02, 2007 at 03:50 PM
Chris,
You did a lot of research. I like the statistical analysis of the numbers thrown around by Cameron and his team. People think "wow! science and math: it must be true." Not! You've exposed the Cameron teams' flaws here. Well written!
I also like the overall premise of your site. Awesome! Keep up the great work.
God Bless!
Posted by: whatplanetareyoulivingon | March 02, 2007 at 06:30 PM
Chris
Your work deserves high appreciation.Let me thank you for this.
N
Posted by: Nasrani | March 03, 2007 at 01:47 AM
I have no stand one way or another one set of facts aginist another is the same as gun control or aboration each side has a story right or wrong it is in what one belives.For centerys we have been told that christ is comming,one generation to the next wether he comes in our life time or not.With out the belife that there is something after life would be casos.Greek gods,Roman gods ect.Reglion keeps the the world from playing god.If jeues tomb is found or not does not prevent us from playing god.Wether reglious or or anti-reglious does it matter as long as there is something to belive in.Take this as what what it is worth but think about whaty is said for smome will be mad and some will ponder and some will rejoice.
Posted by: steve young | March 03, 2007 at 02:17 AM
PLEASE DON'T DO THIS
THE MAY BE THE FAMILY OF JESUS
JESUS WOULD WANT US TO BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE INVOLVED
A Letter of Caution to the Christian Community
The importance of the Jesus Family Tomb discovery can not be ignored. There are too many DETAILS that have been uncovered that REQUIRE more investigation before any further comments should be made about the bones of Jesus or the son of Jesus.
YOUR COMMENTS SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO GIVING FACTS ONLY:
"The RE - discovery of the East Talpiot tomb, the one they are calling THE JESUS FAMILY TOMB, needs to be looked into further by experts, scientists and scholars to be evaluated based on it's merits. This information has not been fully investigated yet."
"The movie raises more questions than it answers and this subject will continue to evolve as more evidence is presented for consideration."
"It is important to remember that there has only been 2 ossuaries tested for a DNA connection, for maternity connection only, which was not established. The Bones, which were found both in ossuaries and out of the ossuaries, have not been fully DNA fingerprinted, examined or identified and to comment on this ongoing investigation is foolish."
"To make blanket statements that one ossuary held the remains of Jesus is very dangerous. There is no SCIENTIFIC evidence of ANY IDENTITIES of the remains found in this tomb"
"FAITH REQUIRES NO DNA EVIDENCE, THEREFORE WE WHO HAVE FAITH IN JESUS NEED NOT WAIT FOR DNA EVIDENCE. THE EVIDENCE IS IN OUR HEART"
Now Look, (I say with a heavy sigh) I you don't know me SHARON LYNN SULLINS, or my beliefs or anything about me. But Jesus knows me and has been in my heart since age 12. I am a Christian I know the WORD was made flesh and walked upon the Earth, I believe in Every single word of the Bible. I've seen the miracles, I've felt the Love. I know in my heart that Jesus left this world, just as described in the Bible by way of the Ascension.
I know it is real.
BUT.... There are details about this particular tomb which can not be ignored.
Now, again, let me be clear: This tomb discovery does not shake my faith in God the Father or Jesus the Son, being the Savior of the world. Nope not one little, tiny bit.
IN FACT THIS FAMILY TOMB FINDING IS GREAT FOR CHRISTIANITY. IT PROVES THAT THESE PEOPLE EXISTED. MORE EVIDENCE.
That what I like to see........ == FACTS ==
It helps when talking to a science minded non-believer. You can talk their language.
I am not worried about those of us who are deep in our walk with the LORD. No..... I am worried about those who will be deceived into thinking that this tomb diminished Jesus' message. God so Loved the World that He gave his only begotten son so that we may have ever lasting life. (with Him)
I am worried that the SCIENCE of this discovery will be pushed away
out of fear = this will make some new, weak or falling believers question their decision for Christ.
THIS SUBJECT IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. You know what is going to happen, the enemy will use this for the destruction of Jesus' credibility.
But take heart, THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR.
I ASK YOU TO WAIT FOR THE FACTS... NOT YET FULLY ESTABLISHED
REMEMBER THE SKULLS
The KEY DETAIL which requires us to reserve our opinion, reminds us that the three skulls were found NOT IN the OSSUARIES when they uncovered the tomb in East Talpiot. These very important skulls are probably not from the first century. The fact that uncovered bones where found within a Jewish tomb by itself is highly suspect.
This does suggest an introduction of human remains after the original tomb closure at the time of Christ.
PLEASE REMEMBER THAT FACT = THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT
THERE ARE HUMAN REMAINS FOUND IN THE TOMB WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED PART OF THE FAMILY AND ARE POSSIBLY FROM 1000 YEARS AFTER CHRIST's DEATH
The skulls needs to be part of your discussion with Believers.
Before DNA material matching is made between the key players in this all important drama - the CHRISTIAN community should reserve judgment and reserve comment.
DO NOT COMMENT ON THE SON JUDAH OSSUARY.
DO NOT COMMENT ON THE JESUS OSSUARY
WAIT ON THE LORD. PRAY FOR DISCERNMENT AND WISDOM.
AS CHRISTIANS YOU NEED TO TALK TO PEOPLE USING FACTS ONLY =
YOU CAN NOT DISMISS THIS DISCOVERY, FOR THE ENEMY WILL USE YOUR IGNORANCE AGAINST YOU.
You need to follow this tomb investigation. Not only that, but you need to make suggestions to the DOCUMENTORS --
Please only educated, intelligent suggestions only.
Be Helpful, = Loving Energy ONLY
Go to the Website: www.jesusfamilytomb.com
post your CONTINUED CHRISTIAN FAITH comments.
POINTS TO TALK ABOUT:
CROSS MATCHING DNA ON ALL KNOWN FAMILY MEMBERS HAS NOT YET BEEN ESTABLISHED -
CURRENTLY:
THERE ARE NO DNA SAMPLES THAT HAVE BEEN FROM THESE OSSUARIES THAT HAVE BEEN POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED TO BE FAMILY MEMBERS OR RELATED TO ONE ANOTHER
Without first taking the DNA sample from Ossuary 80/505 -- “Maria” ,
the MOTHER MARY box and DNA matching it for maternal positive ID
too Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef” – “Jesus, Son of Joseph” box
then doing the same thing over and over with the reportedly known family
members who where also found in the tomb, CROSS MATCHING MATERNAL AND PATERNAL DNA, will you have a real TRUE foundation to base the claim of Jesus' bones have been found.
KEEP THIS IN MIND:
GOD IS IN CONTROL
All WE have are possibilities until proper identification can be established.
I am very disappointed that the film makers made the statement that the Jesus Ossuary, the Mary Magdalene Ossuary and the Judah Ossuary where : HUSBAND, WIFE AND CHILD =
Based on the placement of the Ossuaries in the Tomb.
CAN WE WAIT FOR SCIENCE PLEASE?
Remind the World that this is speculation and not FACT YET!
There are many possible variables.
For all we know these bones found in the Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef” – “Jesus, Son of Joseph” could belong to the skulls that were found.
REMEMBER THIS:
THIS MAY BE JESUS' FAMILY MEMBERS
BE RESPECTFUL
EVEN IF THIS IS NOT, BE RESPECTFUL
Jesus would want us to show love in a firm and respectful manner.
Never believe for one minute that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirt have left us!
For They are watching and in full control! AMEN!
I have urged caution to everyone - CHRISTIANS AND NON-CHRISTIANS alike - about making any assumptions about the relationships of these people and their identities until further DNA evidence can be collected from each bone box and hopefully from the bones themselves.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU CAN REMEMBER IS THE SKULLS THAT WERE FOUND IN THE TOMB WITH THE OSSUARIES ARE NOT FROM THE FIRST CENTURY.
THIS IS UNUSUAL AND AGAINST JEWISH TRADITION.
THESE BOXES HAVE BEEN TAMPERED WITH AND POSSIBLY CONTAMINATED WITH THE REMAINS OF OTHERS. THE BONES HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED, CATEGORIZED OR EVEN EXAMINED PROPERLY.
*****THERE WAS A SHORT COMMENT AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE ABOUT THE FACT THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE HUMAN REMAINS IN AT LEAST ONE OF THESE OSSUARIES.*****
THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED
TALK ABOUT THIS WITH YOUR BELIEVERS.
It is extremely dangerous to say that this is the same JESUS
box and the remains of "THE JESUS OF NAZARETH"
without first taking the DNA sample from Ossuary 80/505 -- “Maria” ,
the MOTHER MARY box and DNA matching it for maternal positive ID
too Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef” – “Jesus, Son of Joseph”
Now when that information comes to light, then you will have a much
clearer picture of the family connection within the tomb.
This also needs to be done with ALL the ossuaries
and bones (if possible) so that any samples can be preserved,
tested and FULLY DNA IDENTIFIED.
Of course this goes without saying that DNA parental identification
needs to be established with the Ossuary 80/503 "Yeshua bar Yosef”
– “Jesus, Son of Joseph” and the Ossuary 80/500:
“Mariamene e Mara” – “Mariamne, also called Master”
with regard to the possible child
Ossuary 80/501: “Yehuda bar Yeshua” – “Judah, son of Jesus”
The evidence of the Ossuaries are very compelling. Pray that the Holy Spirit bring the truth into your heart and to the heart of the world.
All of this bears more investigation with an open mind. Asking for God in Heaven to give you discernment and wisdom is always a good idea, because He will ALWAYS answer.
Thanks for your time,
Sincerely,
Sharon Lynn Sullins
BlessedChildOfGod333
freelancemom@yahoo.com
Posted by: SHARON LYNN SULLINS | March 03, 2007 at 02:56 AM
Sharon, I took time to read your post and have problems with some of the things you are waiting for in the DNA samples. And one evidence based on scripture alone proves the whole "discovery", a lie that attempts to change christianity as described by GOD, JESUS, and the prophets. JESUS' own words can be found that denies this new and any future find. When He warned that if they say, He is in the desert or He is here or there, don't believe them. JESUS didn't say alive or dead. He didn't have to, the ressurection the apostles witnessed attests, His body was removed from earth with the promise of His return with His second coming that whole earth will know at the very moment of His return. The DNA samples will not prove anything, even if according to our imperfect sciences that A mary and A joseph were parents of A jesua or jesus. The shroud of turin carbon dating was found to be inaccurate because of a fire that left a residue on the fibers that threw the test off. And the only reason it was looked into further was because there was a record that the fire occurred. Man is imperfect and anything we do on our own, no matter how astounding, comes with errors. With GOD, we find our way. Without GOD, we lose our way. We can't change the plan of GOD. And GOD'S plan can only be found in the true rendering of HIS word. So yes, I know we must be careful to look at facts. BUT we must be VERY diligent to use ONLY GOD's GUIDELINES to study those facts, not man's science. GOD bless you and all of us in protecting us from being devoured by the wolves, no matter what type of sheep garb is worn . None of this surprizes me, because the Holy Bible tells us all these things before they happen. We cannot know the mind of GOD, however nothing is hidden anymore, HIS Promise is my hope and my only salvation. JESUS is the only way provided. Not some bones to believe in. I hope with all my heart people that are on the fence in any way with this will bear it up faithfully against scripture to expose it for the devil's deceit that it is.
Posted by: lc | March 03, 2007 at 09:52 AM
Chris,
It looks like you've looked into this matter thoroughly. I invite you to visit my own brief online essay on the subject, in which I provide data about the basis for the false claim that "Mariamne" is a likely name for Mary Magdalene, and about the manipulation of the statistics involved. It is at http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/TombOne.html
Posted by: James Snapp, Jr. | March 03, 2007 at 12:19 PM
This is a great post Chris!!
Thanks,
Doug
Posted by: Doug Eaton | March 03, 2007 at 02:37 PM