« Rosenbladt on Justification (Salvation) | Main | Podcast: Rebuttal to the Claims of the Lost Tomb of Jesus »

Comments

Jesus Tomb Exposed

Thank you for your comment on my blog. I have added a link to your site and excellent analysis, please feel free to do the same. Thank you again!

Jesus Tomb Exposed

Jesus Tomb Exposed-

http://jesustombexposed.blogspot.com

Ken L.

The so-called "scholars" are now telling us that Jesus married a prostitute and had a son. (Mary Magdalene was branded a prostitute by similar specious reasoning.)

So Jesus marries this prostitute, and he's just kind of hangin' out around Jeruslem, having a kid and maybe doing a little carpenter work. His preaching days are over, having turned all that over to the apostles.

To determine whether this scenario is true, we need to fast forward 1900 years to one of the greatest minds (albeit fictional) in the history of rational analysis. I am speaking of course, of the great Sherlock Holmes.

I call your attention to what happened, or rather what didn't happen, in the story "Silver Blaze"

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): "Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
Holmes: "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
Holmes: "That was the curious incident."

How is this relevant? Think about it. Where is the mention in the New Testament of Jesus' wedding? Of the birth of His son? Would Paul have stopped by to visit him even once? What about the other disciples? Wouldn't Titus or somebody have maybe mentioned, "Hey I saw Jesus the other day, and he's looking great. The wounds are healing nicely."

Get real people. The claptrap about Jesus tomb, if true, would invalidate the entire New Testament, just because none of this nonsense is mentioned anywhere.

Somewhere in the New Testament, at least somewhere between the book of Acts and the book of Jude, someone would have mentioned Jesus' married life.

Anyone who takes the movie seriously should at least have the intellectual honesty to throw out their New Testament.

karen

I may have missed this, but were they able to determine a DNA link between the Mariamne and the Judah?
And if the Jesus ossuary was written in Aramaic, why was the Mariamne written in Greek?

lc

Ken L, That was the most astute comment yet, bravo!!! It got me to thinking about Paul on his way to Damascus. His account of his conversion would have been very different if Jesus had lived as a mortal after His bodily ressurrection. And why would the debate of gentiles being circumscised, been settled by Peter's discernment? They could've just asked Jesus! It is dangerous to consider any claim that conflicts with scripture because it takes either ignorance in the true word of God, serious lack of faith, or intentional deceit to NOT use God's Word as the ONLY standard to judge all things by. There are many reasons that the body of Christ is sick in these modern days. The Bible spells them out with perfect accuracy. The Bible lists that this would happen, and many people who claim to follow Christ, blind themselves in order to continue their own self-styled beliefs of what God meant and wants. Which isn't going to help them when they "knock" and Christ tells them to "go away, I never knew you". Today's many types of christians scare me for their souls.

Romo

I still don't get all the fuss. Whether or not this was really the Jesus family Tomb makes ZERO difference. Breaking down the bible literally word-for-word ends on the first page as the assembled gospels contradict eachother time & time again. The gospels were assembled in Rome, years after the fact, by men, who are all sinners (as the Bible clearly states). No, I don't believe in the Gospel of Philip nor many of the connections made in the program as they are longshots but how it ended was the biggest tragedy of the show. The one incontrovertable fact is that this tomb certainly is interesting enough to study further & see if those numerous unanswered questions can be answered and hashed out. What was the inscription inside the tomb, that could've answered everything right there.

Wasn't it Jesus, himself, who preached to bring everything into the light? Sealing up this tomb leaves it in the dark and open to falsification.

But to worry that your entire faith would crumble if we ever found His remains or if someone proved he was married & had children in wedlock is both absurd and sad.

Jerry

I believe it is possible. I believe that we have taken what we couldnt explain at the time and made it a god. I think we took a man with extraodinary abilities and made him divinity when in fact he was nothing more than a mortal man. I believe it is very possible that this could be the tomb of jesus and that we just dont want to look at it with an open mind because it would destroy the foundations of modern christianity. The bible is prone to error it is written by man, and it has been transcribed over and over again, its very possible that it was written incorrectly over time, it is also very possible that it was embelleshied to force us to conform more to what they want us to believe. The bible is filled with contradictions throughout it. So yes I believe it is possible jesus got married and had a child and I do believe his remains are here on earth. I do beleive he existed and I do believe he did miraculous things, but I do not believe his body ascended into heaven and he will return, its something written into history to give us hope that death isnt the end. When in fact it is.

Tom

A boilerplate article on the Jesus Tomb was published by the Charlotte Observer yesterday. This article parroted the Jesus Tomb Movie people's claim that the James ossuary came from the same tomb. Early Sunday morning I fired off an email to the writer pointing him to a Jerusalem Post article citing a Daily Telegraph report indicating that the archeologists of the Jesus Tomb deny the possibility of the James Ossuary having come from the same tomb. The archeologist said the 10th ossuary had no inscription and was a different size. The reporter that I emailed at the Observer then contacted the museum officials from the Jerusalem Post article and one of the experts lending their name to the Jesus Tomb movie. The result is some original reporting today on this important story. http://charlotte.com/115/story/40361.html

Uber

I like your review but referring to the New Testament as 'eyewitness accounts' calls your creditibility into question.

It is well known and has been well known for a couple hundred years now that the NT writers are not eyewitnesses.

joel allen

Another crique of the documentary is as follows. The books of Jude and James indicate that the family of Jesus believed in Jesus as Lord and expected his return from heaven. The Jewish Christian church led by the family of Jesus clearly believed in the physical resurrection which implied, for them, that the bones of Jesus be vacated from the earth. The whole point of an ossuary was to save the bones for the day of resurrection. So if the documentary is correct, we have the family of Jesus believing in the physical resurrection while holding on to the bones. This simply cannot be the case.

Keith Schooley

Chris -

Thanks for stopping by my site. You do a good job of presenting the statistical and evidential counter-evidence to Cameron, et al.'s theories.

As I say on my site, in a sense this is all beside the point. Those who want to will latch onto theories such as this one, regardless of whether they make any sense or not. If we focus on being the body of the risen Christ, we will persuade by our example those who cannot be persuaded by reason.

Kevin Mote

After reading the actual archaeological report of the Taiplot tomb (found here: http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/explore/media/tomb_evidence.pdf), and noting the how common the names were in ancient jewish communities, the following exchange occurred to me: JOURNALIST: "We've found a gravesite in Dallas with the names John, Jacky, Bobby, and Edward -- It MUST be the Kennedy family grave!" OBJECTOR: "Um, it can't be -- Ed Kennedy isn't dead." JOURNALIST: "You've been led to BELIEVE he isn't dead. But what are the odds of finding all these graves together? It MUST be the Kennedies!" OBJECTOR:"That's not how Jackie Kennedy spelled her name." JOURNALIST:"Well,there was a newspaper article once that spelled it that way. Perhaps it's a variant." OBJECTOR:"None of the Kennedies are from Dallas; why would they be born there?" JOURNALIST:"It's where John died, isn't it?" OBJECTOR:"Are you sure you're not insisting on this for reasons other than objective historical research?" JOURNALIST:"What? I am offended that you would insinuate that the millions of dollars from book and movie deals are motivating me to stretch the truth! The money means nothing to me! (By the way, the book is available at all major bookstores.)"

Protestant Agnostic

The Gospel of Philip sounds strange indeed. Imagine! Talking animals!! What if a donkey were to talk in a book... how much credibility would you give it? Hmmm... what if it belonged to Balam?

Val

Mr. Agnostic,

I think you've missed the point Chris was trying to make.

Did you read the sentence? He was taking issue with the fact that Philip and Mariamne were PREACHING the gospel to talking animals and according to the story they were converted.

Have you preached the Message of Jesus to your cat or your dog. Do they even need to be saved?

Secondly, Jesus himself puts his stamp of approval on the Entire Old Testament and calls it the Word of God.

This includes the story of the talking snake, the story of the talking donkey, the flood of Noah, Jonah and the big fish. Since he believed these stories to be factual history I choose not to have any opinion less than Jesus'.

As for the poor Acts of Philip. All the evidence shows it is a late document written by gnostics. It was not written by Jesus apostles and it contradicts the apostolic documents. We have no compelling reason include it as one of the authoritative documents.

longshot7

A good piece on the whole. As a skeptical non-Christian, I tend to believe that skeptics who want this tomb to be the tomb of Jesus to validate their nonbelief are as bad as Christians who the rapture to validate their belief in the Bible as literal truth.

A couple points:
1. You are right to discount the Acts of Phillip - apocryphal books should be subject to more scrutiny, not less. But just as we are skeptical of it as a possible 4th century text, we must be just as skeptical about the gospels, which were at least written 30 years after the death of Jesus (Mark) to as far as 70 years afterward (John). Clearly, these are not eyewitness accounts.
2. The presence of Mariameme in the tomb shouldn't sway the validity of it as a Jesus tomb one way or the other. Just because in the gospel texts, Mary carried the name Magdalene, doesn't mean that that was her name or had anything other to do with her as a historical person. There is no secular 1st century text to corroborate her real name. She could have been the wife of Jesus, and the name Magdalene might be a complete authorial fabrication. Again, gospels = not reliable.

I think whether or not this is Jesus' tomb is completely irrelevant. It won't sway the minds of the faithful or the skeptical, so why serve to incense people? Even if it is, I don't think it invalidates Christianity - what's important about Jesus' life was not his death or resurrection, in my opinion, but the things he said and did while he was alive. The rest is mythological claptrap.

Calvin

If Christ's Death and Resurrection don't matter, then we have no hope. There is no God, no Truth, no Light, no Life, and "being nice to people" would only require a simple bumper sticker. Shoot, if the Bible is "myth", then there is no ultimate meaning in life, and we can all do as we please because, ultimately, nothing matters.

Jesus isn't just a Moral Teacher; the Bible says he's the very Son of God. Read Isaiah. Even read the name given to him, Immanuel, "God with Us". If Jesus is not who he says he is (that is, he calls himself God, says he's the light of the world, grants all man into salvation), then this apparent "nut" has no reason being any kind of moral teacher with the outrageous claims he made.

Thankfully I'm standing firm in the evidence in support of Traditional Judeo-Christianity and how it justifies all meaning itself. And I'm wise enough to know the danger of believing some Hollywood production. What surprises me is how someone can put down over 30,000 years of books, archaeological evidence and 2000 years Theological Facts given from the Apostles themselves in favor of a Hollywood production to make money and to cause harm to Christianity.

Christ offers life. He is God and welcomes us home. I'd prefer this over a simple "be nice to people" bumper sticker.

esther

this is just one of the signs that Christ is coming...it cant be true or else our faith is in vain for it says in the Bible that if Christ hadnt risen our preaching would be in vain and our faith also. im not sure exactly what it says but its along those lines...its just satan trying win people over so we dont believe in God..but its all true or else the Bible would be a lie!!!!! and Christianity has survived for a long time so it has to be all true...

Charles Gadda

After all the hubbub of the past week, it should be pretty clear that the "Lost Tomb of Jesus" film is essentially a hoax.

To begin with, the claimed "Jesus" part of the name on the so-called "Jesus son of Joseph" ossuary is simply not legible, as any serious semitics scholar will tell you if you show him the tracing. This is why the original transcriber (see the Israeli Catalogue of Ossuaries) put a question-mark after, and two dots over, that part of the name, thus indicating in standard fashion that he was making a conjecture (in this case one that is obviously remote). The film's producer, however, has carefully omitted this fundamental point from his statements to the press, instead asserting that the reading had been "conclusively confirmed" by unnamed experts. For details, see http://jesus-illegible.blogspot.com/

So I started to poke around to try and understand the mechanics of this hoax.

What I found, somewhat astonishingly, is that James Tabor -- the religion professor who is promoting the Cameron film -- is the same character at the center of the recent claim that the finding of undatable feces near the site of Khirbet Qumran supports the -- now widely disputed -- thesis that a sect of Essenes lived there in antiquity and authored the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Tabor is also involved in the current exhibits of the Dead Sea Scrolls traveling around the country, which have been criticized as presenting a biased and misleading picture of the current state of Scrolls scholarship. For details, see http://jesus-crypt-fraud.blogspot.com/ and the other postings published by the authors of that blog.

For Tabor's "Essene latrine" efforts (also based in part on a misleading use of DNA evidence), see K. Galor and J. Zangenberg at http://www.forward.com/articles/led-astray-by-a-dead-sea-latrine/, or the most recent article by N. Golb on the Oriental Institute website, http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects/scr/).

Professor Jim Davila’s blog (March 6, 2007) http://paleojudaica.blogspot.com/ quotes Tabor as asserting to him in an email: "I have never excavated even one tomb, and I am not even an archaeologist and have never claimed to be such."

Yet Tabor himself, in an article published in the Charlotte Observer, excerpted on the same paleojudaica blog a year ago (February 13, 2006), wrote: "As an archaeologist, I have long observed and experienced the thrill that ancient discoveries cause in all of us. The look on the faces of my students as we uncover ancient ruins from the time of Jesus, or explore one of the caves where the scrolls were found, is unmistakable."

Tabor's Ph.D. was awarded to him by the University of Chicago’s Department of New Testament and Christian Literature (which is housed in that institution’s Divinity School building). The title of his dissertation was "Things Unutterable: Paul’s Ascent to Paradise". He clearly has no training as an archaeologist, historian, or semitics scholar, and we will no doubt be left to wonder at the motivations that led him to become involved in these phony scams.

Edward Smith

Ponder This!
God Thesis

This thought came upon me while I was doing my math homework on 3/20/2007 12:03 PM. Math proves the existence of God! What are the odds that humans would accidentally discover a system, a language, such as math, and that very same language is the only language that can be used to explain the Laws of Physics that govern every thing in our universe? It is safe to say, without actually doing “the math”, that they are astronomically high and possibly higher than most anything considered to date.
All laws of the universe, even those man has yet to discover or fully understand, are governed by the language of math. Math is the language God used to reveal to us, His chosen vessels, that He created the universe. God has always known that man would question His word and He revealed, not hid, His wondrous creation in that moment He created the universe knowing that we would seek it out. By this I mean, without math absolutely none of the higher knowledge we have obtained and used to discover and advance would have been possible.
Every ounce of advancement in human history and culture is owed to math, without which spoken and written language would not be possible. Art, Biology, Physics, and anything else that can be pondered by man, even the process of thought, are all governed by math. God gave us an innate understanding of math when he created us. This innate understanding of math is in all created things of the universe—even in rocks.
Without the conceptual understanding of math, the higher state of consciousness that separates us from all other species on earth would not be possible. That is not an accident that can ever begin to be explained by the weak theories found in evolution. Even when man tries to replace God with himself through science and various man based philosophies, man’s deepest journeys always leads him to the language God gave us from the time of the creation of the universe—the language of math.
Those of us that already know Him have a much simpler version of math revealed in a non-binary written and spoken language called the Holy Bible. It is His love letter to His elect. Ponder that!
EJS

Robert

Sharon,
I read your post and my only comment would be this: "science" does not prove or disprove what's found in scripture. If science agrees with scripture, then by all means, go with it. If it disagrees with scripture, then It's false or incorrect in it's assumption.
We battle with more than meets the eye here. This isn't just James Cameron making an entertaining movie, this is the eternal battle for the souls of men. This is why we write what we write, and take a stand against this "latest" attack on a 2000 year old book.

NewWill

As someone who studies structural hierarchies a lot, I find absolutely no basis for the claim that there is any resembles to Jesus’ family tree. The footprints simply don’t match.

When you develop a hierarchy, you have to be rigorous about it; otherwise, it ceases to have any purpose, and ceases to be a hierarchy. This is just one of those unquestionable facts: an insurmountable design of God’s universe. Without the correct links, there is no structure: there is no hierarchy. This means that if the correct links were not put in place, then we might as well be discussing a random collection of boxes. (Indeed, who is to say they aren’t?)

Assuming we assume they understood the basic facts of hierarchies back then, the links would be the inscriptions. For the hierarchy to work, if someone is called the “son of Joe,” the same must go for all sons of Joe. A similar pattern must exist for daughters of Joe. Also, if person A lacks designation, so must everyone else on the same level (or in this case ‘generation’.)

From the inscriptions provided, the family tree is clearly:

Oldest generation:
1. Mary - Written in Aramaic
2. Mary - Written in Greek as Mariamne
3. Jose
4. Matthew

Medium generation:
1. Jesus son of Joseph

Youngest generation:
1. Judah son of Jesus


The probable tree explains why DNA testing (if accurate) discounted maternal links between Jesus and Mariamne. It also indicates that the people in the tomb can all be from the male side of the family; that is, only people linked to the root by blood (not wives, and husbands.) If that is the case, the oldest generation would be a collection of brothers and sisters. I don’t know the traditions of those times, but it is believable considering how complicated a family can get, and that, it would provide for an orderly system.

Abigail

I think that just because the DNA proves Jesus and Mary are not related from the mother's side, does not mean that they could not have been married. It seems that the critics just keep condemning this film without proposing any comments or theories themselves worth any academic merit. Interesting to note is that the director of the film has responded to these critics; his arguments are compelling and valid. I found video of this interview posted on the official site at www.jesusfamilytomb.com. I strongly recommend checking it out.

bill

Let's look at the statistics of the lost tomb of Jesus I accept the factor of one in a thousand (from literature) as the possibly of finding an inscription of Jesus son of Joseph. Likewise I accept a factor of one in a thousand as the possibly of finding an inscription of a named son of Jesus. This means that for a thousand tombs, only one would have the inscription of Jesus son of Joseph. Of a thousand tombs, only one would have a named son of Jesus. This means that there would be only one tomb in a million with both inscriptions.

For each of the two females names, there might be one chance in ten that the name is Mary. There would be 9 other names. The same statistics might apply to the two male names (possible a named brother and grand father – Mathew). As a result, there is only one chance out of ten thousand million (10 billion – 2.5 million in lost tomb book – 600 by recent calculation in literature) of finding the Jesus tomb. This is like finding a needle in a very very large haystack.

I have not made a point that I feel I need to make. I apologize for my lack of capability in statistics. The authors of the lost tomb state that the chances of finding the tomb (with the names of Jesus’ family) by random chance are so small that the lost tomb is really the "real tomb" of Jesus. Let's call these tombs the "random tomb" (found by random chance) and the "real tomb" (with bones of Jesus and family).

The chances of finding the "real tomb" are important because we might say that the discovered lost tomb is probably the "random tomb" if the chances of finding the "real tomb" are say one in 5 million as compared to one in 2.5 million (10 billion as calculated above)as reported in the lost tomb book.

The area is large and there are many tombs. Again what are the chances of finding the "real tomb" in this area?

For the name of Jesus in the "real tomb", there are other names of Jesus. For each such name, there may be say 9 other names (not Jesus). For each name of Mary associated with Jesus, there are 9 other names - and so on. Continuing with this procedure, the statistics can be repeated for the "real tomb" as was done for the "random tomb".

As a result, there is one chance in 2.5 million of finding the "real tomb" of Jesus. I believe the number is much larger than 2.5 million (10 billion as previously explained).

The "real tomb" of Jesus is also a random tomb because all the names in the tomb are random. By this, I mean that so many variables are involved in selecting a name that it cannot be determined before the naming.

The chances of finding a "real tomb" or a “random tomb" (really the same thing as shown) are so small that I believe the tomb to be a hoax developed recently or in the past.

The chances of finding a very recent hoax are one in one. For a past hoax, it is assumed that the tomb would be located in a place easy to find, and the chances of finding it would be one in a fairly small factor.

For all practical purposes the lost tomb could not have been found. In my opinion, its "finding" is a hoax.

Here I have used only information from the tomb. Many other factors could be considered, but I wanted to evaluate only the tomb and its meaning.

Say that the tomb is real. What is the possibility that it belongs to Christ? Either Mary could be his mother, wife, one of several sisters, daughters, or grand daughters. I say there is one chance in ten that each Mary is his wife or mother. A similar factor could be applied for Mathew or the other named man. This means that there is one chance out of ten thousand possibilities that Mary is his mother or wife, and the other named men (not his son) are his grand father or brother.

I think the best interpretation of statistics indicates strongly that the tomb is a hoax. I do not blame the Discovery team. The hoax could have been developed by someone or a group either very recently or a thousand years ago, but it is a hoax nevertheless in my opinion.


Ismael

First, I'd like to say that I am a believer of God. I also like to expand my knowledge in religion. I've seen the movie on DVD and I've seen almost every video clip from this project, including the hour and a half press video. They clearly state that they made this video to report their finding and to be discussed.

One thing is for sure though. I felt God when I watched this film, especially when they broke through the pipe and the camera revealed a tomb. To me it doesn't matter whether bones of Jesus were in the ossuary, or if Jesus was married or not. I believe in God. Period. I know I felt closer to God after watching this. It felt good knowing that the names they found match names from the bible.

I hate the fact that their are people out there that immediately call this garbage. A friend of mine, from the beginning, kept saying, "whatever...come on, etc."

I guess if the information or facts are not handed to you by God himself then it is not true. This film was interesting, just like this article on this website was interesting. The more information the closer we get to the truth. This film did not change my belief. To me, if Jesus is in the heavens then that is all I need. How he lived his life or how he died on this earth matters little.

I think it would be magical to find the tomb of Jesus or his family.

Steve

Ismael,

If the bones in the box are those of Christ, then the Christian faith is worthless and God is a lier. We have to return to the practice of animal sacrifices for the forgivenss of our sins since our sins still remain since we cannot fullfill the obedience to the Law.

It is the death of Christ is the only way we can be found righteous before a holy God since we are all poor miserable sinners who desire only God's judgement to eternal damnation. We cannot so a single thing that can merit God's favor outside of Christ.

If one is a follower of God, then one must also be a follower of Christ. We cannot come to God except through Christ since Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Britney

Thank you!w

sara

Big thanx to webmaster!e

Felipe

One thing I would like to say to the conservative fundamentalists.

- We do not know how the resurrection works. -

Can you for sure say that it means the same body was brought back to life? You cannot exclude other possibilities, such as the formation of a second body. We don't know. If we were really to find physical remains of our Lord, why do all immediately think it is the end of Christianity? No one but the Lord has experienced the point of resurrection. The apostles mention that He is alive again, but AFTER the point of resurrection which none have witnessed first-hand.

Let this be a reminder that whenever something comes that makes you second-guess your faith, there is none but the Lord to count on. He knows that which we do not, and so only on him must we trust.

Felipe

I've been inspecting your rebuttal somewhat more closely, and decided I could make some counterpoints.
Please excuse the use of capitalization to compensate for the lack of bold or italics.
----------------------------
"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 ."

First, the declaration that Rahmani is one of the film's experts is incorrect. You can go to the website http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/experts.html yourself; you won't find Rahmani listed. That is why the documents clearly state: "TAKEN FROM: A Catalogue..."

So the comments noted speculating that the ossuary with the inscription 'Joseph/Jose' must be one of the parents is only a speculation of the one who catalogued it. And to point it, the comment stated "MAY indicate that these are the ossuaries of the parents of Yeshua". The keyword here is "may". That means that the comment is NOT a conclusive statement.

And just so I may add my own interpretation of the use of a nickname... Giving a nickname to the father is unheard of in Jewish culture. But we do know that Jesus assigned names to his disciples, as we know is the case with Simon whom he renamed Cephas, or "Rock", or Peter. We know that some of Jesus' brothers were disciples as well. Taking the probability that Joseph could be a brother and perhaps even a disciple, then the application of a nickname would fit the context. This situation makes far more sense than giving a nickname to the father.
----------------------------
"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!"

Actually, the Gospel of Philip would not be the only source to speculate that Mariamne is the Mary Magdalene mentioned in the canon. The Eastern Orthodox church referred to someone named Mariamne known as a sister of the apostle Philip. She can be found in a clear listing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_17_(Eastern_Orthodox_liturgics).

And here is the link to the translation of the Gospel of Philip: http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gop.html. Anyone is welcome to do use your Find function for the words 'leopard', 'goat', or 'dragon'. You won't find them. Perjury is detestable, one we all know the Lord would not wish us to do, especially to our own fellow believers. Instead, we should be speaking nothing but the truth when we enlighten one another.
----------------------------
"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."

None of us know what happened to all the brothers and sisters of Jesus. They did not leave them out just because they wanted to, but because that is what was found in the ossuary. However, the film does go to show that Jesus did in fact have brothers and sisters.
----------------------------
"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."

In the quote, Kloner did not say at what point was there a missing ossuary. Obviously, there was no missing ossuary at the time of discovery, but it had to have been lost in some manner AFTER DISCOVERY because the ossuary was not within storage like the other 9 ossuaries found.

Kloner is a human, which lends itself to making mistakes. Kloner could have made a mistake in his recordings of the dimensions of the ossuary.

The film presents far stronger evidence that links the James ossuary to the Talpiot tomb, which is forensic evidence. Each tomb has its own distinct petina print, which is a composition of minerals, that makes it unique from other tombs. The petina sample found on the James ossuary matched that of the petina in the tomb. This is HIGHLY suggestive evidence linking the James ossuary to the Talpiot tomb. And that adds another family member to the tomb.
----------------------------
"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 film did not claim Matthew to be a brother. In fact, it even made sure to state that. There is no strong evidence to suggest that Jesus was married. There is no Biblical evidence of Jesus having a son named Judah (although this guy here suggests the possibility of a son suggested through the Bible: http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/forum/TO_Simcha_Jacobovici-6-431-0-0/). However, there is no counter-evidence (or evidence, for that matter) to prove or disprove the familial link between Judah the son, as found etched on an ossuary, and Jesus the father. There is strong evidence linking the James ossuary to the Talpiot tomb. Simon's ossuary was found in there. (Remember, there were 10 ossuaries found. Not only 6.)
----------------------------
Just to make sure that I am in no aggressive position, there is some things they really should have done differently with the DNA.

Sharon shares my most sincerest and strongest agreement. They should have pushed to get DNA links between the son of Jesus, according to the ossuary, and Jesus or Mariamne. Linking the son with either would be far more suggestive than finding no link between Jesus and Mariamne. But the forensics expert who gathered the material for DNA inspection had trouble finding suitable material for research, and the DNA experts at the Lab too mentioned the difficulty of extracting the DNA.

I am saddened that there is yet further research to be done on this tomb. Instead of thinking this could harm our faith, which we all should have to be strong by the Lord, having something that gives conclusive evidence to the life of Yeshua would be what the non-believers need.

Monica

When I first saw this movie my heart was deeply saddended. I thought if this is true everything I live for means nothing. After reading this I realize how false this film is and that my faith in Jesus is not in vain.

Marilyn

Very good web site, great work and thank you for your service.+l

jdfh

Good luck with your site in the future!k

Keno

Excellent web site I will be visiting often.G

Tony

Why are you people wasting your time even debating this documentary?

It's obvious it is the work of demons to plant seeds of doubt.

If someone asks you about this etc, then follow this verse:

Matthew 5:37 ""But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes ' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil."

Tony

The Truth does not need to be defended.

Let those people who passionately seek to discredit the Bible and truth believe as they wish.

At Judgement day they will weep with shock when they finally realise they believed a lie.

Bro. Mario

you have gotten a spirit filled revelation on this. Keep it up and let us not be carried away by these false documentation of people that are out there to destroy our faith in the Lord Jesus. God Bless You.

John

In your second paragraph, you state that Paul was "an eye-witness of Jesus’ resurrection". The is not true! Paul claims that he can assert Christ's resurrection because of his conversion experience!
You should know how to read the bible! It always appalling me to read such nonsense. Everybody in traditional Christianity knows that Paul, before his conversion experience on the road to Damascus, did not know Jesus personally . No wonder programs, you claim to debunk, can go on without challenge.

Joel

This movie is just another repeat of Dan Brown's Da Vinci code: and uses the same old tricks. Find old, outdated evidence, and then make something "new" and "exciting" out of it. Ever since Christ rose from the dead, people have been trying to prove it didn't happen, and this is just yet another failed attempt.
Well Done! Very clear evidence.

However, I agree with John's comment: Paul never claimed to be an eye-witness of Jesus’ resurrection.

Tony

Attention: Bro Maria

You said "You should know how to read the bible!"

Does this mean you believe and claim you have perfect underdtanding of the Bible? Y/n?

Do you believe that everything you read in Bible you undertood 100% perfectly?

If NOT, then you can NOT make such a silly comment as "You should know how to read the bible!"

Your ego/pride and arrogance keeps you deceived and away from the True Light.

Only a humble person, humble as a child, can enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 18:3-4)

Felipe

John mentioned a true fact in the Bible that Paul was not an eyewitness of Jesus's resurrection, and neither did he witness the crucifixion. Paul never met Jesus before he ascended! When I went back to look at that detail, a very interesting detail popped out at me.

Quoting from that second paragraph, Chris Rosebrough says: "In 1 Corinthians 15:14-15 the apostle Paul (who claims to be an eye-witness of Jesus’ resurrection)". The very detail, aside from what John pointed out, was that Chris used the word "CLAIMED" (caps for emphasis). Typically, when one person says that another claims something, the former does not completely believe.

So we have two problems in that early second paragraph.
1. Chris got his Bible facts wrong.
2. Chris does not fully believe, at least some things, in the Bible.


And how is it that it is "obvious [that the documentary] is the work of demons to plant seeds of doubt"? The primary point was to find more evidence of Jesus's existence!

I'll state it again because it is an important point for many Christians who so easily scoff at the documentary: we do NOT know the EXACT details of the resurrection process other knowing that Jesus was alive again. This postulates various possible explanations, such as the formation of a second body! Something interesting that would give some affirmation to that possibility is this:

It has been argued by Leon Morris (The Gospel According to John/The New International Commentary on the New Testament) that the Greek original (Μή μου ἅπτου) is better represented by a translation of cease from holding on to me or stop clinging to me, signifying that Jesus is saying that although he is risen he has not returned in the same form that he left.(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_not_touch_me)

I'll also repeat this:
The Gospel of Philip would not be the only source to speculate that Mariamne is the Mary Magdalene mentioned in the canon. The Eastern Orthodox church referred to Mary Magdalene as Mariamne and sister of the apostle Philip.

Hillari

Thanks so very much for taking your time to create this very useful and informative site.

Michael

Thanks for the nice post!

Free PS3

thultyBlott


Excellent site, but most of messages here are not related to its contents...
http://test-shablon1.sunporno.name/?topic=396&mode=1&view=true adul
http://test-shablon1.sunporno.name/?topic=7&mode=1&view=true lesbij
http://test-shablon1.sunporno.name/?topic=534&mode=1&view=true portno
http://test-shablon1.sunporno.name/?topic=199&mode=1&view=true adulf
pornh
lesib
lewsbi
amal

Arghya

Regarding the counter arguments given by the writer of the soooo long literature, lets face some reality.
1. Whatever a religious text says, reincarnation is not possible, nor is it possible that a dead man will come alive and ascend to heaven, unless there is an escalator.Then again the question comes, where is the even exactly located? In which part of the galaxy? Jesus was a great man but don't press unnecessary divinity upon him.

2. The author says the statistical probabilities are false.Math can never be wrong!!

3. Jesus and Mariamne were not married-may be may not be.SO a DNA analysis of all members to confirm their relationship was necessary.

4. 1:30000 probability in those days simply means that the entire present state of Israel will have only one or two such families.

5. A carbon dating analysis of the bones should have been done to ascertain the exact age of the bones.

6. Mathew might not be Jesus's brother. He could have been someone else's son.

Just by claiming something to be false assumptions does not prove anything.Please read statistics before commenting upon the mathematical tools.

Arghya

Regarding the counter arguments given by the writer of the soooo long literature, lets face some reality.
1. Whatever a religious text says, reincarnation is not possible, nor is it possible that a dead man will come alive and ascend to heaven, unless there is an escalator.Then again the question comes, where is the even exactly located? In which part of the galaxy? Jesus was a great man but don't press unnecessary divinity upon him.

2. The author says the statistical probabilities are false.Math can never be wrong!!

3. Jesus and Mariamne were not married-may be may not be.SO a DNA analysis of all members to confirm their relationship was necessary.

4. 1:30000 probability in those days simply means that the entire present state of Israel will have only one or two such families.

5. A carbon dating analysis of the bones should have been done to ascertain the exact age of the bones.

6. Mathew might not be Jesus's brother. He could have been someone else's son.

Just by claiming something to be false assumptions does not prove anything.Please read statistics before commenting upon the mathematical tools.

nic

What a exciting topic! The truth is this: Whatever side you take on this being the lost tomb of Jesus and his family, you can find the evidence. Was Mary of Magdalene closer to Jesus than is written? Did Peter put her on the back benches in the New Testament on purpose? I personally can say with all my heart, that we do not know the true story. Certain Christian text is said to be obscure, but where is Mary of Magdalene in the new testament? I mean she was Jesus' closest apostle. The best thing about this Documentary is that it makes you find what YOU really believe. If you read these Christian texts carefully, you'll see some of the main characters slowly fade. Why? There is text showing Peter having problems with Mary of Magdalene. Women at that time had very little say. So was it the typically male writing the New Testament? In a whole, the story has alot of "loopholes" throughout. We are made to fill in those holes with our own beliefs. This topic in life will never die, people will fight for their religion forever. Having a belief system is very important to everybody. Its up to you to decide if that belief system is as strong and right, if built on only half the story.

Clint

nic, I feel your on to something there. The truth is no one will ever know the TRUTH until were dead. Being raised Lutheran and in a private school, I was force fed many things that I now look back and laugh at. I still have a strong belief in God and have faith that in the end there has to be something better than this. It's the belief of hope and of a better life later on. Where all injustice will be dealt with fairly. Wasn't that what Jesus preached? Not fighting over stupid details that are holes in 2000 year old pages of writing. I know alot of pastors would love to disagree with me, and thats fine everyone has their take on it. Everyone just needs to respect everyones opinions, if that happened this world could at least be a slightly better place.

Wtimb

Chris,

Great job! Longshot7, your comment that the NT documents are not eyewitness accounts because they were written 30 to 70 years later is erroneous. An eyewitness account is one witnessed in the first person. Eyewitnesses are a primary source. The fact that they were written later means they were not contemporaneous with the events. That is completely different that not being an eyewitness account.

lc

1 Corinthians 5 thru 8 lists all of the eyewitness accounts of Jesus' ressurection. Paul being the last to see Jesus in His ressurected body. And Chris' word usage of "claimed" does not insinuate that he doesn't believe Paul's testimony. Paul did claim seeing Jesus in His ressurected body. To say someone claimed something, doesn't mean you suspect them of lying. Unless of course it is hinted at in context. I don't see where it could be presumed that Chris doubts Paul's claim. That is just jumping at the conclusion that one wants to base their comment on. Which is sad because in many comments that have the liberal wait and see attitude, that have confidence in man's science, brings to mind 2 verses straight from the bible : Who hath believed our report? And : It is better to trust God, than put your confidence in man. Reading those quotes in the context that they are written makes you decide whether you believe in the only true God, or will be one who is carried off by the vain imaginings of man. The temptation to believe we can dig up or postulate the truth of God, leads us away from God. We will "find out" in the end, is a proof of doubt in itself. I believe God is truth and believe in His promise to preserve His Word. There is no science to prove or disprove God, Jesus, or true faith to be God's gift. Science plays no part in spiritual proofs of anything. It does try in the material fabric of our world and universe to prove origins of everything, with the absence of God. Science is the way to understand the world in a way that we don't need God. That we become the creators of the future. In our manipulation of God's creations, we have the ability to do many things. We don't put too much thought into wondering if we should though.

Dillon

All Simcha And Cameron is trying to do is lead gods people away to make them turn christians against there faith. All they care about is there money they can make off of there false stories. An it can effect a lot of lives..

The comments to this entry are closed.

October 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

A Little Leaven

Support This Site

Follow Me on Twitter

  • Twitter

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter