Jesus' Tomb Found in Israel

[Chuck]

A tomb that once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?and those of his wife and son?has been found in a suburb of Jerusalem, said the makers of a controversial film in a press conference today.

The filmmakers base their claims on the study of ten ossuaries?stone boxes used to hold the bones of the dead?that were unearthed at an Israeli construction site in 1980.

Inscriptions on the boxes, in addition to DNA tests of tiny bits of tissue found inside, suggest that the cave was the final resting place of Jesus, his disciple Mary Magdalene, and their son, the filmmakers said.

The claims, if verified, could threaten key tenets of the Christian faith, most notably that Jesus never married or had children and that he was resurrected three days after his death.

"The evidence is compelling," said Jane Root, president of Discovery Channel, which will air the film on Sunday. "The consequences are enormous."

The 90-minute film, called The Lost Tomb of Jesus, was directed by journalist Simcha Jacobovici and produced by James Cameron, director of such Hollywood hits as Titanic.

The movie has already sparked criticism from archaeologists and clergy alike.

In a statement issued today, the Reverend Rob Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council, denounced the film's findings as "nothing more than a modern day circus sideshow."

"At worst, it is pure chicanery," he added.

Inscriptions and DNA

Thousands of ossuaries have been found in Jerusalem over the years. Hundreds were uncovered during the building boom the city experienced in the 1980s.

Like many such ceremonial boxes, the ones uncovered in 1980 in the suburb of Talpiot have been dated to 2,000 years ago. (See a time line of early Christian history.)

Source (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070226-jesus-tomb.html?source=rss)

[mark]

A tomb that once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?and those of his wife and son?has been found in a suburb of Jerusalem, said the makers of a controversial film in a press conference today.



Source (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070226-jesus-tomb.html?source=rss)


Remains of Jesus??......and......wife & son??

Nah, can't convince me.

It's a hoax, IMO

Anything to sell a movie.............see ya mark

[KELTYSBOY]

I'm confused. It was my understanding it was the gravesite of Elvis. Somebody please tell me what the heck is going on!!!

[Chuck]

I still would like to know where they will get the base DNA sample to prove their claims? They say they can prove or disprove with DNA but I want to know where they will get the know sample of Jesus DNA from to compare to the remains they have found.

I don't know a bunch about DNA but that don't make sense to me.

[Jeremy]

DNA from the Shroud of Turin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_turin) maybe?

I wrote this in one of my blogs about a year ago:

Cloning of Christ, Probably a Bad Idea
In an apparent bid to see how blasphemous science can get, researchers are delving into theories of whether religious artifacts that are supposed to be linked to Jesus can be used to clone Christ. The Shroud of Turin, for example, if it is actually the burial cloth of Jesus, might contain enough blood stains to capture the actual DNA of Jesus Christ. This DNA could be used to create a clone of what many believe, depending on their religious affiliation, to be the Son of God. Already attempts to clone animals have been successful in the lab, with the famous "Dolly" the sheep becoming the first absolute clone in the 1990s. Human cloning is expected to become a reality as well in the coming decades. Throw all of this together and you have a real dilema if you switch from science to theorizing about religious prophecy. Say the Shroud of Turin really is the burial cloth of Jesus, and that the DNA can be extracted, and that the DNA leads to an exact clone of Christ. Would this fulfill the prophecy of Christ's return? Or would it instead fulfill the prophecy of an Anti-Christ? If the latter happens and the rest of the prophecy is true, this one should probably stay in the realm of science fiction. Making sheep, no big deal; Making Anti-Christs, um... not such a good idea.

[Chuck]

Thought about that after I posted but figured the samples might be too degraded after 2000 years. Then if not, the DNA extraction could be permanently damaging to the Shroud of Turin as well. The group that holds the Shroud might not be to Happy with that idea.

But correct me if I am wrong. Isn't there a large cloud of doubt over the authenticity of the Shroud? With that doubt coupled with the doubt of the new tomb find and negative results would just amplify conspiracy theorist and a positive result would devastate a religious world.

[Flame]

I know a little about DNA and I'm thinking the rest of us will shortly (ya know with Anna Nicole's baby and all) but they have to have someone (known mother, father, sibling etc...) or a sample of the person they are trying to say this it to compare the DNA to. So which do they have? If these were found in 1980 why are they just saying this? Oh yeah a movie, almost forgot that.

The Christian beliefs are based on FAITH, so I don't believe anyone who has a strong faith base is going to be detered by some claims that don't seem to have much basis. However, people who aren't strong in their faith or ones who may be looking for a way to say he just didn't plain exist will be another story.

[Jeremy]

Thought about that after I posted but figured the samples might be too degraded after 2000 years. Then if not, the DNA extraction could be permanently damaging to the Shroud of Turin as well. The group that holds the Shroud might not be to Happy with that idea.

But correct me if I am wrong. Isn't there a large cloud of doubt over the authenticity of the Shroud? With that doubt coupled with the doubt of the new tomb find and negative results would just amplify conspiracy theorist and a positive result would devastate a religious world.

Yes, a really cool theory goes that it's actually a painting. Some even think by Leonardo da Vinci. I don't remember the specifics of it, but there's some slight perspective anomalies in the image that don't measure up to the human body. Beyond that, it's a completely correct image. What's more is that, though flat, it's one of the first examples of bas relief, in other words you could create a 3-D image off it if you wanted to. Basically, if it isn't Jesus, it's still really cool.

So they were thinking why and how could someone create such a perfect image and still have the slight perspective being off? In thinking of the different ways, they realized that if someone was creating it with a primitive lens-based camera, the perspectives are perfectly correctly incorrect. The date of the shroud plus this really odd technique that shouldn't have been around in the Middle Ages makes them think - Da Vinci.

As for extracting DNA from it? Beats me, that's sci-fi. In sci-fi, they made a whole lot of dinosaurs from a tiny mosquito in Jurrasic Park. Of course, if you accept all or at least some of the religious artifacts claimed to be directly tied to Jesus, there's better blood sources to work from. A village in Europe (forget which) has a festival each year centered around a vial that they say contains the blood of Christ.

Blood is intrically tied to the story of Christ, so real or not, a lot of religious icons that came out of the Middle Ages crusades to the Holy Land are said to contain Jesus' blood.

[acoolmom777]

Here is a link for ya......


http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0301/p13s02-lire.html

[Jeremy]

Great link CM. Reading through it, I think it's cool that the objection against the idea is just as flimsy as the idea for it. Leaves it up to everyone to make up their own mind.

[acoolmom777]

so true....it leaves it up to each ones own thoughts and beliefs

[kdown]

Put me in the " don't believe " column

[Jeremy]

I'd have to go in the agnostic column. Not in the religious sense, but just in the "some things are unknowable" sense. Not on this tomb issue, just on the whole "What was Jesus' life like" in general. I wholeheartedly agree with my stock phrase, however: "I want to believe".

[acoolmom777]

I believe that Jesus dies for our sins and ascended in to Heaven, and his body was not in the tomb…therefore there would be no bones to bury and no DNA.
And so what if he had a wife and child/ren, He was made to live here on earth as a man, but he was and still is the Son of God….if he had a family it would not make my belief in him or his cause for his birth and death weak what-so-ever. Jesus is Jesus….he will always be my truth the way and the light.
Hence my saying in my siggy....

[Chuck]

I believe that Jesus dies for our sins and ascended in to Heaven, and his body was not in the tomb?therefore there would be no bones to bury and no DNA.
And so what if he had a wife and child/ren, He was made to live here on earth as a man, but he was and still is the Son of God?.if he had a family it would not make my belief in him or his cause for his birth and death weak what-so-ever. Jesus is Jesus?.he will always be my truth the way and the light.
Hence my saying in my siggy....

My sentiments exactly.

The bible is a good guideline to history of biblical happenings but I do not take it as absolute truth. If I did I would let down so many times by findings by the scientific communities on a daily basis.

Christianity is belief that goes deeper than what since can prove. It is a faith that you believe in and not a proven. If it could be proven it would not be a faith.

You will never know Gods plan till after death all other things proven or written by man are subject to what he can "See, Feel, Smell and grasp. You just can't depend on that.

[Jeremy]

I think that's the biggest problem people have with this story. Not that he was married or had a child, that part was already fought over with the Da Vinci Code debates and everyone's already made up their mind one way or the other on that. The problem with this story is that when Jesus died, he was supposed to have taken his body with him.

[Chuck]

I think that's the biggest problem people have with this story. Not that he was married or had a child, that part was already fought over with the Da Vinci Code debates and everyone's already made up their mind one way or the other on that. The problem with this story is that when Jesus died, he was supposed to have taken his body with him.

That's true, at least according to the men that wrote the bible. Still is a faith issue on whether you wish to believe the science or take your faith on faith.

[Wildcat Fans]

it is all about faith and the statement that chuck made is true the bible was written by MEN and it has been interpreted so many times we just have to go on our faith

[mark]

it is all about faith and the statement that chuck made is true the bible was written by MEN and it has been interpreted so many times we just have to go on our faith

I somewhat beg to differ.

If only written by men, how would one explain this verse in my Bible:

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New International Version)

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.


It says "ALL" scripture.....not some.

Just thinking out loud...............see ya mark

[Chuck]

I would explain it as "The Gospel According to (Insert Favorite Disciple Here)"

In your post it would be Timothy.

[Jeremy]

You know, there's an odd thing about faith. People equate it with believing in something without any evidence. The opposite is science, where only the evidential is believed. That's a strange way of looking at it because nothing is believed in without evidence. You take a belief in something and you'll find all sorts of evidence to reinforce your belief.

Is it a subjective versus objective thing? Not really. If you take the subjective idea that if you pray or meditate or whatever it is you do, that you'll find peace, and you pass that thought off to someone else and tell them that if they pray/meditate they'll find some peace, that's pretty much the scientific method. In other words, its something that can be tested objectively.

The scientific method is basically that you start with a question, you do a little background on that question, you predict a result, perform a test to see if that result is true, and then you compare your results with others.

Here we pose the question of whether or not prayer/meditation is useful, we read up on it to find out what past thoughts were, from that we predict that it may be useful, we figure we can test it by praying/meditating ourselves, and then we compare what we feel with what others felt after they ran the test. In doing so we find that yes, it makes us feel peaceful and everyone else who followed the experiment agrees.

That doesn't sound much like faith, that sounds like science.

Of course, I'm mostly Buddhist, so what do I know? ;)

[Maxwells]

Amen

[acoolmom777]

I believe…. Jesus is the Son of God, and that he died for our sins…the Bible was written by men yes…. but men of God….
But I also believe the book was wrote as a guideline for our walk in faith…..Your faith is in your hands and the out come of your life’s end is your own destiny. …no one lives your life but you…..I respect everything on this earth and it’s space here (except snakes…I can’t get passed that one…lol)…I believe everything has a purpose and we should respect that purpose, we use everything in our lives with a purpose, therefore directing out destiny.
And if you stop and think about it….all regions and beliefs are really leading to one thing….”a better place in our destiny”.