Filmmaker Discovers Jesus' Tomb

[Guest]

Thought this might spark some discussion. (link below)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17349123/

[Guest]

here is a pretty good criticism of Mr cameron:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=54474

[Guest]

TK,
Thanks for the link -- I just read it. The tone of that article really put me off. It seems that we Christians are a very touchy bunch and overstate our case too often when people oppose us. If archeologists say the "tomb" doesn't hold weight then just say so and give reasons for rejecting it. The article doesn't even tell us why the archeologist rejected the claim, yet I'm curious to know. I'm already aware that most people in the media don't like Christians so we need to present the facts without implicating ourselves of the same kind of slander that is used against us. I'm a big fan of just stating the facts without all the emotional trappings that plague these debates. What ever happened to peaching the truth in love?

[Guest]

[I'm a big fan of just stating the facts without all the emotional trappings that plague these debates. What ever happened to peaching the truth in love? ]

Amen.[/quote]

[Guest]

JC- i agree with you-- sort of. i think the purpose of the article was simply "damage control." in other words, get it out there that there are real problems with the documentary, w/o getting overly technical into the archaeological concerns, etc. i agree that the claims as to why is is NOT the tomb of Jesus needs to be supported, but that wasnt the purpose of the article. already there is all sorts of buzz about this "shocking new discovery" and there needs to be something out there to provide some balance.

i dont think there is anything wrong with going after cameron for trying to capitalize on very dubious claims.

TK

[Guest]

Did anyone watch the show on Discovery Channel? I didn't get a chance to see it because I don't have cable television. Surely someone caught it.

[Guest]

JC ... yes, I saw the program last evening. It was interesting, but did not even draw close to becoming convincing. It was nothing short of a DaVinci Code remake - basing its conclusions upon conjecture and writings long-since dismissed.

The only thing that sparked my interest was the probablity table introduced by a mathematician who supposedly calculated the odds of all of the names found in the tomb being together. His calculations indicated that the odds were extremely in favor of the probablity of this being the tomb of Jesus' family. Since I do not trust the film maker's other sources (i.e. The Acts of Phillip), I wonder if the mathematician had been provided with all available information by which to reach his conclusions.

peace,

dane

[_Derek]

I don't have cable, so it should be a while before I get to see the film. But I did recieve an email of a very even handed and thought provoking email from Stand to Reason. Here it is.

Wailing at the Tomb?

Christians Should Face the Facts in The Discovery Documentary

By Gregory Koukl

The documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” hadn’t even aired yet and many Christians were already in a panic. Just the suggestion that someone found Jesus’ bones in a limestone box had believers by the droves shaking their fists or sticking their heads in the sand in a don’t-confuse-me-with-the-facts posture.

Apparently, many Christians don’t even need to see the evidence to pass judgment. When one Evangelical web site polled its visitors with the question, “Do you believe the ‘Tomb of Jesus' documentary, which denies the resurrection of Christ?” 97% said no. This was three days before the documentary even aired. Blind faith is so convenient, isn’t it? You never have to actually confront your critics.

Then there’s the bullies. One media watchdog demanded Discovery “cancel this slanderous ‘documentary.’” Another prominent Evangelical organization composed this letter for their constituents to hammer Discovery with:

"I resent the Discovery Channel's attempt to demean and belittle Christianity by saying it is based on a lie. It is hard for me to believe that The Discovery Channel would dare do such a 'documentary' on any other religion.

"It may turn out that you have done Christianity a favor by awakening millions of Christians to your anti-Christian bias and bigotry. Perhaps they will no longer stay silent."

This kind of bullying is profoundly embarrassing to me, a follower of Christ, and should be discomfiting to every thoughtful Christian. It is not only a dismal retreat from a legitimate challenge that must be answered; it’s obscurantist.

Look, if the Bible says it and you believe it, that might settle it for you, but it doesn’t settle it for millions who might be interested in your ideas and are waiting to hear a thoughtful response to what appears on the surface to be a fair challenge.

There are good reasons to doubt the conclusions of this documentary, but no one will ever know them if Christians pull up the drawbridge and bellow from the parapet. Having seen the documentary, here are some problems that quickly come to mind:

Scholars have known about these tombs for over 25 years. There’s a reason they haven’t taken these names seriously. Only three have any direct biblical significance: Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. And that cluster of names is statistically unremarkable. In fact, it would be odd if a family with those three names was not found in a tomb together, given their common use (there are at least four ossuaries discovered inscribed “Jesus, son of Joseph,” and one in four women were named Mary, so it’s even money that one of these tombs would have that combination). And connection of Jesus to any of the other names? Wild speculation. So what you have here is a creative guessing game.

The entire argument is based on the statistical significance of the names in a cluster. If Jesus was married, and if Jesus was married to a woman named Mariamne, and if Mariamne was also a nickname for Mary Magdalene, and if Jesus had a brother named Matthew, and if Jesus had a son named Judas, and if the now-famous James ossuary belonged to James the brother of Jesus, then you’d have all the members of Jesus’ family together in one tomb. But that’s a lot of “ifs.

Even though this is called the “Jesus Family Tomb,” there is no hard evidence that any of these so-called “family members” is even related. The only DNA testing that’s been done—between Jesus and Mariamne—came up negative. Let me repeat that: The DNA test came up negative. That is fact. The rest is speculation.

The documentary claims, “Jesus and Mary were married, as the DNA evidence suggests.” This is nonsense. Think about it. How can DNA evidence suggest someone is married? DNA can’t “suggest” anything about legal relationships, only biological ones. In this case, the DNA evidence showed Jesus and Mary were not related by a mother, not that they were husband and wife. The truth is, she could have been married to any one of the males in the tomb, or to none of them for that matter. The DNA “suggests” nothing.

The researchers claim they’re just trying to connect the dots? Fair enough. But why connect the dots the way they did? I’ll tell you why. Because it tells their story. There are many other legitimate ways to connect those same dots—some much more probable than the way the documentary connects them, but won’t give the story they’re promoting. But, of course, that wouldn’t create breaking news, would it?
Jesus’ family was a poor family from Nazareth, not a middle- to upper-class family from Jerusalem. So this tomb is the wrong kind of tomb located in the wrong city.

The documentary claims Jesus spoke in codes. This is false. Jesus spoke in parables, like many of the teachers of His day, not in codes that needed to be deciphered. They say Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ most trusted apostle. But you have to wait 400 years before this evidence pops up in any alleged historical record. They said that Jesus’ family members were executed because He was a pretender to throne of Israel. This is pure fiction. Notice what this accomplishes, though. All of these little exaggerations and inaccuracies make an unlikely tale sound more plausible when, on its own unembellished merits, it is not.

What we have here are two different characterizations of what happened to the body of Jesus of Nazareth 2,000 years ago. One is based on artifacts—the ossuaries—and one is based on documents—the historical records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Paul. Now granted, these kinds of things are not entirely exact science, but all things being equal, which do you think gives us more precise information, bone boxes or written records? The written records, obviously.

The claim of Jesus’ resurrection, was part of the earliest, most primitive testimony regarding Jesus. And it was made by those very same people that the documentary suggests knew Jesus’ bones were actually secretly buried in Jerusalem. Why would so many of them die for this lie when they knew it was a lie? It doesn’t add up. But that’s what you must believe if you take seriously the conclusions of this documentary.
If Christianity stands or falls on the historical fact of Jesus’ resurrection, as the Apostle Paul said, then Christ’s followers have no liberty to retreat behind blind faith or hide behind an angry scowl.

No, if you’re a Christian you shouldn’t run, whine, scream, or have a religious tantrum. Instead, you should be thanking the Discovery Channel for giving you the chance to step up to the plate and knock this soft ball out of the park.

[Guest]

Thanks Derek for the article. That pretty well sums up my feelings on the show.

The TV show leaves so many holes in its line of thinking that it really began to be annoying. For example, they tested the DNA of "Jesus" and "Mary Magdeline" and found they did not share the same mother. The scientist who tested the DNA then concluded that if they were buried in the same family tomb then they must have been married. What does a DNA specialist know about first century burial customes?? How could he make such a leap of logic and still remained straight-faced? Why didn't anyone ask him if they could have been half-sibilings via a father? And why didn't they comment on checking the DNA of "Jesus" and "the Virgin Mary" to see if they were related?

I think the answers to those questions are tied together with the idea that the film makers simply had an agenda in mind - and it wasn't to showcase unbiased truth.

Near the end of the show they made the suggestion that while Jesus was on the cross (according to John), He committed the care of his mother to his "son" rather than to John, the beloved disciple. They failed to read John thoroughly, because it is recorded in John 19:27 that the beloved disciple took her into his home - hard to believe that the young son of a homeless preacher had his own place!

Finally, the most glaring question any reasonable critic would ask - but that which was not entertained is: Why would Jesus' family and disciples risk absolutely everything by labeling Jesus' ossuary - surely they were aware of the implications of finding His remains? Wouldn't it make more sense to bury his remains in a box under a different name so that there "secret" could be maintained?

Still unimpressed ....

peace,

dane

[_Derek]

Apartently, James White has corresponded via email with the DNA specialist. It appears that he was taken out of context. Here is the entry on Dr. White's blog.


http://www.aomin.org/index.php?itemid=1809