Do not forget to watch "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" tonight, 9 EST, on Discovery

[mtnsnake]

It's gonna be sure to raise more than just a few Christian eyebrows, although if they can dismiss the theory of evolution, I'm sure they'll come up with some good justification for dismissing the theories offered on this documentary tonight on the Discovery channel.

Leaning on Theory, Colliding With Faith

Creationists reject the theory of evolution. Religious pilgrims still line up for the Shroud of Turin. So it is unlikely that many Christians will lose sleep — let alone faith — because of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” on the Discovery Channel tonight.

The documentary, which carries the seal of approval from its executive producer James Cameron (“Titanic”), has already caused some ado, however, with bold assertions that clash with conventional Christian doctrine. Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had a son, Judah, according to the filmmakers. And all three were laid to rest in a family tomb that is now buried deep beneath a Jerusalem apartment complex.

And, of course, the filmmakers’ claim that they identified the burial remains of Jesus of Nazareth — including traces of DNA — suggests that he was not bodily resurrected, after all.

Much more at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/03/arts/television/03stan.html?ex=1330578000&en=8def379f0b45b716&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

I guess when archaeologists discovered this same tomb quite a number of years ago, they didn't know at the time that the inscription on one of the tombs in Jesus's family burial site, "Mariamene e Mara", is actually going to be proven tonight that it signifies none other than Mary Magdalene...and because of this, Mr. Jacobovici (from the documentary) concludes that the only other reason for them (Jesus and her) to be buried together is that they were man and wife!

I can't wait to hear the reactions of a few of my Catholic relatives & friends tomorrow. Should be something to behold!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Satan put those bones there as a test.

If you believe this documentary you have been deceived by Satan.

See? It's that simple.

[SpiralHawk]

81. How do we know Beelzebub didn't make you post this obviously Satanic message?

Are you willing to undergo the Truth Trial by Flagellation?

[Richard D]

2. DNA?

What would they compare it to?

[TahitiNut]

9. Lots of Jesus' DNA is available for comparison.

Just go to any Roman Catholic church and collect transubstantiated samples from the Eucharist. :shrug:

[Radio_Lady]

53. I won't be watching it. Thanks for the reminder -- I have to go to sleep early.

[Radio_Lady]

91. UPDATE: Finally stayed up and watched the show. See my post # 90 downthread.

[dysfunctional press]

80. or ccheck the stool sample of those who took communion yesterday.

nt

[Speck Tater]

3. By this time tomorrow every Christian in the world ...

... will have converted to Buddhism.

Well, maybe not, but I can always hope. :-)

[Dave From Canada]

57. Why?

I really don't understand the need by some to put down certain people of faith.

[Greybnk48]

4. Have it set on my DVR

thanks of the reminder. It should be interesting.

[BushOut06]

5. I don't see how it could possibly prove anything

This has already been attacked by scholars and historians. For one thing, there is no DNA database to compare any DNA to. Even if they did manage to find DNA in the tombs, how could they possibly know who they were from? Also, the names listed are among the most popular names of the time. I'm not really a big fan of this type of sensationalism - why else would James Cameron be involved, if not to pump up the hype involved? It's been my experience thus far that most of these "sensationalist" claims usually fall flat on their faces.

[mainer]

6. Read the article. DNA used just to support possibility of marriage

No one's saying that DNA can prove it's Jesus. All it was used for was to prove that the "Jesus" bones and the "Mary Magdalene" bones were not genetically related -- thus, were quite possibly man and wife. What makes this theory intriguing is purely based on statistics. What are the chances that this grouping of names would be buried in the same tomb? In particular, a grouping that includes the rather specific name of Mary Magdalene?

What I find most interesting, actually, is that so many people reject this automatically, without even bothering to read the articles. Are we so close-minded that we refuse to even listen?

[BushOut06]

8. Not rejecting, just highly skeptical

The first thing that really strikes me is that they got a major Hollywood producer to do this. I'm sorry, but I've seen too many "exposes" - Al Capone's vault, Hitler's diaries, Jesus' brother's skeletal remains, etc - to fall for everything that comes along. Personally, I'd rather wait and let others dissect this, analyze the claims, etc before coming to any conclusion one way or another.

[CJCRANE]

70. James Cameron also did a good documentary

about the wreck of the Titanic, so he does have some experience in the field of doc.

edited.

[Radio_Lady]

93. Are you referring to "Ghosts of the Abyss" (2003)? If so, I found that experience totally boring.

However, I did not see it in wide screen.

On the other hand, I do believe James Cameron is a worthy producer and director and wish him well with his work in the future. As a movie reviewer, I don't usually rate TV shows, but I would give "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" on the Discovery Channel a "B+" on Ellen's Entertainment Report card.

We've had wonderful opportunities to visit Israel in the past. One of the tour guides told us, kind of tongue-in-cheek, "We think this happened right here (wherever we were touring in Nazareth, Bethlehem, Haifa, etc.), but if not exactly there, it certainly happened SOMEWHERE around here!"

I loved that line!

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Upcoming projects for James Cameron:
From: http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0000116/

The Dive (2008) (announced) (producer)
Battle Angel (2009) (pre-production) (producer)
Avatar (2009) (filming) (producer)

[Beelzebud]

11. Statistically it would be quite common... Those were very common names.

[tibbiit]

17. is this really true or

is it a debunking talking point?
Where those names really that common?
In a small town what are the odds that they would not be "The" Jesus, Mary etc.
I keep seeing these names are common, well... how common.
tib

[mainer]

38. No, statistically, it would be pretty unusual.

Yes, "Mary" was a common name. Yes, Jesus was a common name. Yes, Joseph was a common name. But "Mariamne" was unusual. And to have those names in combination, in one tomb, makes it all the more persuasive.

Let's say that "Mary" was 25% of the female population. And "Jesus" was 25% of the male population. (A generous assumption.) And Joseph was 25% of the male population. (Jesus's tomb said "son of Joseph.") The chances of just the combination of those three names together would be .125 x .125 x .125 = 1/500. (If 25% of the female population was Mary, then it would be 12.5% of the total M + F population)

Now, add in the fact there was also an ossuary with the name "Mariamne" (Mary Magdalene), which is regarded as quite specific a name and unusual for its time. Suddenly, the odds become much more convincing. Especially since Mariamne and Jesus were, by DNA analysis, not genetically related.

(If there's a statistician here, maybe you can point out if I'm mistaken in my logic.)

At the very least, the statistician they quoted said the odds of that happening are 1/600. But others place it at one in a million.

As for James Cameron doing it for the money -- uh uh. He doesn't need the money. He's doing this because he's fascinated by Biblical archaeology. He also funded the investigation into the scientific basis for Genesis, which was another fascinating project.

Mind you, I'm neither religious nor a Christian. But I do have some background in anthropology, and I tell you, this is one of the most interesting projects I've come across in a long time.

[Beelzebud]

88. Nothing suggests "Mariamne" is Mary Magdelena except wishful thinking.

And a DNA test can not test for marriage. Therefore the DNA "evidence" is pretty weak...

[NoodleyAppendage]

50. Mary Magdelene was a common name?? Mary, maybe...but not first and last name.

n/t

J

[Garbo 2004]

52. Magdelene is not her last name. And it's not on the ossuary. n/t

[Beelzebud]

87. The name "Mary Magdelene" isn't on the ossuray....

In fact, It isn't even Mary.

Furthermore, Magdelene was not her last name, it was where she was from...

[GreenPartyVoter]

12. I am not convinced of the statistics yet. But I will surely be watching the show. To me

it makes little difference as I am not really the Christian who focuses on miracles and the death and resurrection, but rather on the life of Christ.

[spoony]

7. Please

People with semi-functioning brains can dismiss this, it is nothing like evolution. Let's not sully actual science with this glory-hounding bullshit.

Seems the only people excited about this just want to rile a group of people they don't like.

[mtnsnake]

15. Nothing like an open mind

lol

[spoony]

63. So

you have an open mind about creationism? Is that what you're saying? No, of course not. You believe the overwhelming science in favour of evolution, right? Me too. So why wouldn't you believe the scientists who have outright dismissed this as piss-poor archaeology? Perhaps some...underlying motive? Like I said, no one would get on board this abortion of a theory if it wasn't for the potential to hurt people they don't personally like.

[mainer]

67. Actually, it's the science that makes the compelling argument

It's the religious believers who dismiss it out of hand, and say "it just can't be true," and yet haven't yet refuted the statistics.

[spoony]

68. Lol

Read the other threads. Seriously, there's no science in this thing. Unless you want to go down the footprint-in-dinosaur-print road, which is the flipside of the basket you're putting your eggs in.

[mainer]

73. the other threads are by Christians or people who haven't watched it

I'm supposed to take those as "proof?"

Even Scientific American has an article about it -- and doesn't reject it out of hand. It quotes scholars who bring up the commonness of the names, and whether the Jesus family would have been buried in Jerusalem, and whether or not they were rich. But it concludes with this quote, admitting that you can't say it isn't possible.

From Scientific American:

"Both sides of this debate are extraordinarily difficult to prove given the paucity of historical evidence, something this controversy has in common with nearly all archaeological and historical disputes. "As archaeologists we are always reconstructing a picture based on incomplete evidence," notes Magness.

As a result, the calculations made by Feuerverger and others rest on premises that must be decided by historians and archaeologists, who are still far from agreement on even the basics of the Talpiot tomb.
"I did permit the number one in 600 to be used in the film—I'm prepared to stand behind that but on the understanding that these numbers were calculated based on assumptions that I was asked to use," says Feuerverger. "These assumptions don't seem unreasonable to me, but I have to remember that I'm not a biblical scholar."

[spoony]

83. extraordinary claims

Require extraordinary evidence. If you honestly think this thrown-together nonsense reaches that level, there's really nothing else we have to discuss. Saying "well it's not impossible" is the equivalent of waving a white flag, because every archaeologist, and frankly anyone who doesn't have an axe to grind, damn well realises how silly this publicity stunt is.

[onenote]

76. the archaeological experts (nonreligious) have rejected this theory for years

Can you say tv ratings?

[Rock_Garden]

10. I'm looking forward to it because of Simcha Jacobovici.

The series he hosts, "The Naked Archaeologist", always uses the best scholarly references and interviews, and he goes to a lot of trouble to attempt to prove his theories. Can't wait to see what he does with this one.

[Bridget Burke]

78. Darn! I'll try to catch a re-run.

The Naked Archaeologist is one of my favorite shows.

Simcha has an odd sense of humor & likes to stir up trouble. Yes, he has a fine professional background. But he'll have an interesting "take" on the whole situation.

[Rock_Garden]

97. You know they'll rerun it several times.

You nailed Simcha. He's one of those people who's born to rebel against mainstream archaeology. It's refreshing!

[quinnox]

13. I'd put this one in the category

of shows claiming they found Noah's Ark. No cigar

[mentalsolstice]

14. As a Catholic...

I won't be surprised if it rocks the beliefs of only a few. As for myself, even if they were able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was Jesus, my beliefs would still hold firm, as they are based on who Jesus was as a man, and the message of love, tolerance and charity that he left to us. Sorry, but if I were one of your relatives, you'd find my reaction pretty unexciting, and probably (yawn!) downright boring.

[mtnsnake]

16. It's not just that it's the bones of Jesus

It's the discovery that the tomb of the woman also in the same burial spot is said to be that of Mary Magdalene, when previous archaeologists thought they were of a different woman when they encountered the same find years ago. Supposedly the discovery (alleged) that the tomb in question turns out to be Magdalene's is the big surprise, not that the other tomb in the same spot belongs to Jesus. That they already knew.

[mentalsolstice]

19. And so?

Are you saying the fact that Jesus has been found (if we've already known this for a long time, it must've happened during the Friday news dump), which debunks the resurrection and ascension, is not going to be of shock to your Catholic friends and relatives. However, the fact he was buried next to Mary Magdalene is going to destroy their world. Sorry, but it doesn't destroy mine in any way. I've always been skeptical of organized religion, as are many Catholics I know. So really, if it turns out the Church has been holding out on us, I think you'll be surprised that many of us, who are inspired by Jesus' message, will go with business as usual.

Many Catholics are pretty intelligent, they'll be able to work it out in their minds...

[charlie and algernon]

23. why are you so adament about destroying people's beliefs

many democrats are christians. not all christians are the fallwell-type fanatics. I thought democrats are supposed to be the tolerant ones?

[mtnsnake]

26. Do you always sensationalize and spin nonsense like you just did?

In no way did I do anything you accused me of. How lame.

[mentalsolstice]

28. To quote you

"I can't wait to hear the reactions of a few of my Catholic relatives & friends tomorrow. Should be something to behold!"

Not accusing you of trying to debunk someone's beliefs. However, I'm just wondering why you're only interested in the Catholic response. And why do you reckon it will be something to behold, as opposed to the Methodist, Baptist, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim response? I'm just curious is all. :shrug:

[mtnsnake]

32. Do you personally know my Catholic relatives and friends?

If you did, you'd know why I said what I said, but you don't, so there's no need for you to get so bent out of shape about it.

I'm Catholic, btw, myself and when my Catholic friends and relatives end up discussing this we'll all be a lot more lighthearted about it than the people in this thread are, who really could stand to lighten up a bit. Jeesh.

[mentalsolstice]

34. Great!

Maybe if you had added that in the OP, it would've been a little clearer where you were coming from.

[Garbo 2004]

24. First, not multiple tombs but 10 ossuaries in a tomb. Archaeologists knew that the names were common

first century names and thus not particularly remarkable. The only "surprise" is when out of that years later someone would claim the ossuaries and names were "proof" that the ossuaries had contained bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalen based on such "rigorous scientific" means like the coincidence of the names to the Biblical stories and that the alleged "Jesus" and "Mary" apparently were genetically unrelated, according to their tests. (The filmmakers didn't run DNA tests on any bones recovered btw, just the two ossuaries.)

Then to make their story even better, they also toss in the "James" ossuary which does not have a provenance and has been declared a fraud with the forgers currently facing charges in Israel. Despite that, the filmmakers assert that the James ossuary came from the tomb and the inscription is not a forgery.

[mainer]

42. The "James" ossuary wasn't found in that tomb

It was found in the forger's apartment.

I'll have to watch the show, but I wasn't aware that Cameron was claiming that particular James ossuary was part of this grouping.

[judaspriestess]

30. I feel similar about this

I was raised Catholic and I no longer consider myself one, but I am still a Christian who believes in what Christ taught. I never really bought into the idea that Jesus body and soul rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. I always looked at it as if his spirit ascended to heaven as we should. I don't know that just me.

[Mick Knox]

47. Personally, I find this very exciting.

This is very historical.

Regardless of what you think about Christianity, the reality is there is no person as significant in terms of history.

I'm watching it with an open mind towards learning and science.

I dont know if true or not, but it could be, and it is very exciting to me.

I'll leave the mocking and idiotic comments to freepers and their polar opposites in idiocy.

[Mr. Ected]

18. Regardless of the Veracity of This Documentary

It still goes to show just how slanted the MSM is in reporting the news.

I did not read a single report or review of this program that did not include, in its first sentence or paragraph, "experts doubt" or "scholars debunk" the basis of the show.

Just like in their treatment of the DiVinci Code, the media wants to make sure the status quo will NEVER be questioned.

[Beelzebud]

22. The experts DO doubt it. The archeologist that found the tomb in the 80's doubts the claim...

And just FYI. The Da Vinci Code, while a very entertaining and intelligent book, was labeled fiction for a reason.

There are many "facts" in that book that are easily shown false with a little research.

[Jack Sprat]

62. True

The lazy MSM typically dismisses something out of hand. They are too lazy to check something out. It has to land in their lap. Investigative reporting for them means going to the GrudgeReport.

[BushOut06]

74. Should the MSM simply accept this on the face of it, no questions asked?

Surely you can't be that naive. With something of this magnitude, there are going to be LOTS of questions asked. So far, I've seen some very valid complaints about this documentary, and watching it last night, their presentation came across as highly argumentative (not really a documentary), and making wild leaps of logic.

[Mr. Ected]

98. Be Real. My Post Said REGARDLESS of the Veracity

The problem is that the MSM was already quoting naysayers before the special even aired, and placed their disagreement in the first sentence of their reports. They wanted to make certain that all the beautiful minds were already made up beforehand. Sorry, I don't appreciate being corraled...particularly with so many Christian nutcases disclaiming evolution, and feigning persecution these days.

[Retrograde]

20. Really?

I think there may be a few unanswered questions and tenous conclusions, to be charitable.

""Mariamene e Mara", is actually going to be proven tonight that it signifies none other than Mary Magdalene...and because of this, Mr. Jacobovici (from the documentary) concludes that the only other reason for them (Jesus and her) to be buried together is that they were man and wife!"

Or she was the wife of one of the other male inhabitants of the tomb. From what I've seen of Jacobovici's television show, he can be somewhat credulous at times.

[demrabble]

21. Whatever For?

Why in the world would I want to waste my time watching some film producer go on about some "discovery" he has made?

If I wanted to watch something about archeology, I might be inclined to watch a program featuring an archeolgist?

But James Cameron??

Please.

[KoKo]

25. James Cameron Pushing his Lates Movie...and Discovery Gives him Free Promotion

...wonder why that is? :eyes:

[slowry]

29. You read too many headlines.

The MSM has pushed this as "James Cameron claims to have discovered tomb of Jesus", but that's misleading as all hell.

Now, I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter to have an opinion on this, but the only "debunking" of it I've heard has been from religious people, who say things like:

"There were lots of Marys around at the time."
"It's impossible because it contradicts the bible."

Those are paraphrased from articles I've come across. It seems like it's at least worth looking into.

[mzteris]

27. dam nit! What to watch?

The Dark Ages is on the History Channel at the same time. . . AND


David Blaine is on A&E (I think that's the channel) in a marathon........



:banghead:

[slowry]

31. Looks like it has been "postponed".

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/167535/lost_tomb_of_jesus_postponed_by_discovery.html">http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/167535/lost_tomb_of_jesus_postponed_by_discovery.html

[mtnsnake]

33. Bummer. I told my wife this morning something like that woudln't surprise me

if they put the halt to this show.

Censorship at its finest.

[Garbo 2004]

40. Perhaps you should check the sources for the article that claims the program's been cancelled.

First, the article states the showing was to be Monday, March 5th. But here in the US it's being shown on Sunday, March 4. Hmn....

Then if you check out the source links, you can see the source of the info is an article from India. Follow the links as I did and one finds an article that states Discovery channel isn't showing the program in India, although there is no direct statement or press release from the Discovery Channel itself.

Sloppy reporting and inattention to relevant detail lead to erroneous conclusions.

[mtnsnake]

41. My hat's off to you, Garbo.

Lesson learned!

[Garbo 2004]

35. That report is based on an article in an Indian publication. There's no indication that the program

will not be shown in the US.

Link to article re: India: http://dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1082821

[mtnsnake]

39. Thanks!

:thumbsup:

[mtnsnake]

36. I don't think your link is correct. They're still saying on Discovery that it'll be aired.

[slowry]

37. D'oh.

My bad. I came across that and noticed it wasn't in my satellite listing; must be bugged.

[karlrschneider]

45. You probably know but it just started (on Dish network at least)

...

[slowry]

46. :(

I don't know why, but the Discovery Channel up here in Canada is just a million episodes of "Supertools" in a row, lol. That's why I didn't read the article above closely; seemed true.

[NoodleyAppendage]

51. Is the Associated Content article about postponement a plant to dissuade people from watching?

I'm watching the show right now on Discovery (basic cable) at 10pm EST.

I'm smelling an Xtian rat.

J

[Garbo 2004]

54. Yes because everyone reads that website as opposed to their local listings. And they don't realize

that they don't live in India. Good grief.

[slowry]

59. Hopefully you aren't accusing me.

I was looking for headlines, to show how a lot of MSM stuff dismisses it as "Titanic director claims (such and such)", but came across a couple headlines about it being "postponed" or even "canned". Instead of giving the articles more than just a cursory glance, I checked my satellite guide, which showed just reruns of something called "Supertools".

Stupid dumbed-down Canadian Discovery Channel is all I get, apparently.

p.s. 99.9% (repeating, of course) Atheist here.

[brentspeak]

43. How is this any different than Geraldo Rivera opening Al Capone's vault?

[mtnsnake]

44. I don't know. Watch it in a few minutes and then tell us about it after the show. nt

[Xenotime]

92. This has Jesus, not Al Capone and James Cameron will provide..

cool morphing CGI effects whereas Geraldo had a shovel.

[IChing]

48. Interesting, better data, statistics and quantitative explanations than what I expected

"I think I need to call in a plumber"
Best line so far.

Food for thought, it makes Jesus
more of a real living person than anything else provided to me in the historical record so far.

[TahitiNut]

49. Interesting. Thinking in terms of a civil jury, it's hearsay evidence and physical evidence.

Where the hearsay evidence is in conflict with the physical evidence, no contest. At this point, the case they've presented seems to meet the "preponderance of the evidence" test. IMHO, of course.


(Oh ... "hearsay evidence"?? The King James' VERSION of the Bible, indeed any version, is, at best, hearsay, imho.)

[Radio_Lady]

90. All religious writings were written by men, usually years to hundreds of years later.

I watched the show while folding laundry to get ready for our vacation to Hawaii; my husband dozed off several times. The show was interesting; the recreations of scenes were excellent, however the DNA "science" is in dispute. The graphics showing lineages was presented in a spectacular way.

I also watched the discussion with Ted Koppel and others afterwards, but got pretty bored as they stated their various positions.

Sad that the Israeli government agency ordered the tomb covered for "safety reasons" in the apartment complex -- seems there could have been a way to temporarily deal with this while archeologists did some more work if necessary.

In peace,

Radio Lady

[mainer]

55. A compelling case! It begs for a full-fledged academic debate

The Ted Koppel follow-up seemed like a stoning of the filmmaker. ("How can you justify a dramatic re-enactment?"!! As if dramatic re-enactments are done all the time to illustrate points.) And the two religious "scholars" Koppel had on to offer an opposing voice were completely ineffective. As one of them said, "even as I watched it, I just KNEW it was wrong." That's the best he could do. He just KNEW it was wrong.

[mtnsnake]

56. I couldn't agree more with you, especially about Koppel

whose only MO was to put down the film and its findings. Only trouble for Koppel was that the two filmakers had a solid answer for every one of his put-downs. Koppel was just as ineffective as his two religious scholars and ten times as arrogant.

Good post, mainer.

[bklyncowgirl]

64. Extroadinary claims require extroadinary proof--where are the bones?

Attempting to link archaeological remains to an historical person is one of the most difficult things to do--and one of the easiest things to do wrong.

When the discovery in question are the remains of a religious figure who millions of people believe ascended into heaven body and soul, you better have something more to go on.

If the actual bones could be exhumed you might be able to ascertain things like age at death and also if the skeleton showed evidence of death by crucifixion--sharp objects through the wrists, feet etc. I find it hard to believe that the Israeli archaeologists just dumped them--they have to answer to the Rabbinical authorities--surely some records must have been kept and the remains treated with dignity. I also couldn't see responsible archaeologists simply dumping human remains without some means of recovering them if questions arose.

Of course in this case, not finding the remains and what they might mean if the deceased turned out to be a man in his 30s whose injuries are consistent with death by crucifixion might be a hell of a lot easier than dealing with the uproar.

[mainer]

65. They explained where the bones are

As per tradition, after the ossuaries were catalogued, the IAA removed the bones of all the ossuaries and buried them together in a common grave before they could be studied. So even if they found the burial site, they would have a jumble of remains all together. It's not the filmmakers' fault that they don't use the actual bones as part of their argument.

What upsets me is the utter lack of curiosity of the IAA. I would have held onto, or at least recorded, the sex and approximate age and charactersticis of each skeleton before discarding it forever. But I guess that when tradition and religion is involved, curiosity must be suppressed.

[bklyncowgirl]

71. The bureaucratic imperative--if it looks like controversy--suppress it.

I find it kind of hard to accept that although the Israelis deal with a great many finds and thousands of human remains, that they'd be so cavalier as to dump bones all together in a heap. I studied archaeology in college and it seems that the correct thing would be to record where human remains were reburied and to maintain the integrity of the find--at the very least put them in seperate boxes.

As for why they'd show so little curiosity, I think I know the answer. Let's say you're a bureaucrat in the IAA and an archaeologist comes in and says "We've found this ossuary with the remains of someone named Jesus son of Joseph..."

This is your wost nightmare come to life. (Alright, maybe not the worst, the worst in your powder keg of a country would be someone coming up with the mortal remains of Mohammed) Millions of people passionately believe that Jesus ascended body and soul into heaven. But here you have this discovery which could turn the foundations of western civilization on its head.

Do you order a thorough examination of the remains or do you treat it as a routine find and avoid the backlash? If you're a Jew Jesus was a nice (if somewhat misguided) Jewish boy so as long as the Rabbis are happy with the treatment of the remains, it's no skin off your back. Christians too would find this discovery extremely inconvenient. Sure, there's your duty to history but maybe in this case maybe some things are better left buried.

[spoony]

89. You're going to get this thrown into the 9/11 forum

for going over the tin-foil limit. So the Israelis are now in the business of covering up and perpetuating the notion of the resurrection? Fascinating idea. But wrong.

In fact there have been three ossuaries found that bear the same inscription as this one. It's interesting but not unheard of. No cloak and dagger needed to understand that one group of people are doing serious historical work and do it well, and that another group wants to sell a shiteload of books.

[sakabatou]

58. I think they screwed up

According to my parents Jesus's name is ben Yosef, not ben Yehosef. >_<

[kineneb]

60. nah, doubt the whole thing

Persian tradition has it that Jesus escaped to the east and Mary (his mother) is buried in Iran. Palestine got too hot after his arrest, and the remainder of the family went east. Thomas, Jesus' twin brother, is the one who died on the cross (as stunt double). According to that tradition, Jesus was murdered in India, after attempting to spread his message of compassion there.

James, another brother of Jesus, remained in Jerusalem with fellow Jewish followers, awaiting the return of their Messiah (=anointed one), who was supposed to return and help them kick out the Romans. The plan, however, failed. Another guy, Saul/Paul, invented a Hellenistic-style mystery religion very loosely based on this Jewish guy, which became "Christianity". Anointed one, "Messiah" (Hebrew) gets translated as "Christos" (Greek) and becomes a "divine" title.

...just as good as any of the other tales about Jesus' life...

[GreenZoneLT]

61. Geez, what a gull-a-bull.

Yeah, there's a coincidental similarity in the names; that proves that it's Jesus' bones, all right. Good grief.

And DNA evidence, well, that MUST prove it, right? Since it's so easy to compare it with known DNA samples of Jesus and his relatives. :eyes:

This "documentary" belongs on the Discovery Channel, unfortunately, because they also give credence to "documentaries" on ancient astronauts, UFOs and bigfoot.

[mainer]

66. They never claimed the DNA evidence proved it

Where did you get that idea?

[mainer]

69. None of the skeptics have yet challenged the following

-- The names on the ossuaries
-- the provenance of the ossuaries
-- that the name "Mariamne" was so unusual that no other ossuary has ever been found with it
-- that the name "Mariamne" was used in two separate surviving ancient religious texts (4th century and 2nd century) to refer specifically to Mary Magdalene
-- that the statistics supporting that this cluster of names puts the possibility at AT LEAST 1/600. (And it's actually much better than that -- perhaps 1/6000 -- because the statistician chose to be extremely conservative

The only challenges I heard from the religious scholars was that "they just don't believe it."

[BushOut06]

75. Here you go

http://www.christilling.de/blog/2007/03/guest-post-by-richard-bauckham.html

I find it strangely odd, that here on DU, so many people are willing to accept this documentary without any real scrutiny. Aren't we the ones who like to think for ourselves, ask questions, and challenge ideas?

[mainer]

77. Just from the start, there are problems with this blog

First, he admits HE HASN'T SEEN THE DOCUMENTARY
Second, he says there were at least 35 ossuaries found in the tomb. The IAA document says that only 10 were found.

[CJCRANE]

82. The only thing this guy

seems to add to the debate is a very long discussion about the origins of Mary Magdalene's name which was too complex for me to follow. So either he is much smarter than me, or he is simply muddying the waters (or both).

[mainer]

85. And right off the bat he gets the number of boxes wrong

Ten boxes were found, according to IAA. Six of them were inscribed. That seems to be a matter of record.

[KittyWampus]

86. It's up to those making assertions to prove Mariamne is Mary Magdalene.

[ShortnFiery]

72. Thanks!

I'll remember NOT to watch it. Hey, that's why we call it FAITH. :-)

[lynne]

79. The Biblical version of Geraldo and Al Capone's vault -

- a lot of hype, a lot of spin and ultimately a box with no scientific proof or historical evidence that can be proven. I'm a history buff but I don't see any history in this. Just $$$$.

[WI_DEM]

95. I agree.

[Roland99]

84. It raised some interesting points but it was largely speculation.

[LanternWaste]

94. I'm really looking forward to reading about this

I'm really looking forward to reading about this once we get some peer-reviewed articles in the Archeology periodicals. Until then, I really can't see this as anything more than Jurassic Park w/ Jesus or another Dan Brown novel.

[SaveElmer]

96. I watched most of it...I thought they did a pretty good job with it...

Definitely did not prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt...but alot to follow up on...and to my mind critics have not disproved it either...

However, it is up to the claimants to make the proof as they are making the claim...I hope there is some further follow up on this...

Those who criticize it because it goes against their religious beliefs I dismiss out of hand...that is not refutation but faith...

Those who criticize it on the science and history I take more seriously...