Archaeological film claims to find Jesus' tomb

[MrBishop]

New film documents discovery of Jerusalem cave containing ten caskets believed to hold remains of Jesus, Mary, Mary Magdalene and others
Ariella Ringel-Hoffman
Published: 02.23.07, 10:26 / Israel Culture
The cave in which Jesus Christ was buried has been found in Jerusalem, claim the makers of a new documentary film.

If it proves true, the discovery, which will be revealed at a press conference in New York Monday, could shake up the Christian world as one of the most significant archeological finds in history.

The coffins which, according to the filmmakers held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, his mother Mary and Mary Magdalene will be displayed for the first timeon Monday in New York.

Jointly produced by Emmy award-winning documentary filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici and Oscar winning director James Cameron, the film tells the exciting and tortuous story of the archeological discovery.

The story starts in 1980 in Jerusalem’s Talpiyot neighborhood, with the discovery of a 2,000 year old cave containing ten coffins. Six of the ten coffins were carved with inscriptions reading the names: Jesua son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Matthew, Jofa (Joseph, identified as Jesus’ brother), Judah son of Jesua (Jesus’ son - the filmmakers claim).

Decades of research
The findings in the cave, including the decipherment of the inscriptions, were first revealed about ten years ago by internationally renowned Israeli archeologist Professor Amos Kloner.

Since their discovery, the caskets were kept in the Israeli Antiquities Authority archive in Beit Shemesh, but now two have been sent to New York for their first public exhibition.

Although the cave was discovered nearly 30 years ago and the casket inscriptions decoded ten years ago, the filmmakers are the first to establish that the cave was in fact the burial site of Jesus and his family.

The film, which documents the stages of the discovery, is the result of three years labor and research. It will be broadcast on the international Discovery Channel, Britain's Channel 4, Canada’s Vision and Israel’s Channel 8, which also took part in the film's production.

According to the filmmakers, the film’s claim is based on close work with world-famous scientists, archeologists, statisticians, DNA specialists and antiquities experts

Linky

 

[MrBishop]

To be more specific - they did a CSI type of movie on a tomb that was discovered 30 years ago.

 

[chcr]

I bet lots of people will watch it but that's the point, isn't it?

Question though, are they saying Jesus remains are in the tomb? If so, they haven't really thought that through very carefully, have they?

 

[MrBishop]

They're not using it to prove the existence of Jesus as anything more than a human being tho' - and to try and show that as a human being, he married and had kids before the crucifixion. - that's quite a stretch, but that's hollywood for you.

 

[Leslie]

I don't see the wife and children as such a stretch. And I don't see it as changing anything Christian-religion-wise, either. In the end, Jesus the man being married would really only generate some distrust in church interpretations, not the actual faith, I think.

The big hairy ordeal would be the whole "the resurrection didn't happen" or "it was only his soul floated up and his body remained" thing.

 

[MrBishop]

It's the distrust in the interpretations that would be a big thing IMO.

Priests stay celibate because of Jesus' celibacy, eh

Oh..and if Jesus had kids, perhaps he has grandkids and great-grand kids etc etc... there could be thousands of people living today who are direct descendants of Jesus.

Wouldn't THAT be a kick in the head?

Imagine: Leslie, great-great-great-great-granddaughter of the son of God. How's THAT for a title

 

[Leslie]

Great great great great ad-infinitum granddaughter of some rabble-rousing Joe from Nazereth. woot. I guess my tree-hugginess is hereditary then?

Anyway. I don't think it should shatter anyone's base faith if it were somehow shown Jesus was married/had kids. They should maybe think about getting their tithes back, or not blindly trusting their religious institutions, which would be a good thing, but faith shattering? I don't see why. If he was man enough that the crucifiction was actually a sacrifice, then he was man enough to have urges/fall in love/have a drive to procreate, no?

The big hairy ordeal would be harder to get over, but really. The stories are so parably and vague that after all the other stretching and interpreting, it's not so far a stretch to interpret the story as his body actually *didn't* rise up to the heavens?

 

[MrBishop]

That's the difference between those who think that the Bible is one big parable or tool to help teach morals and those that think that the Bible is a verbatim account of what really happened.

For the latter - it would BE a big hairy deal. If Jesus was married and had kids, why wasn't all this mentioned at all?
Was it mentioned but edited out?
If so, by whom and for what purpose?
What else did they edit out?
Where is the Book of Jesus? etc etc...

 

[chcr]

That's the difference between those who think that the Bible is one big parable or tool to help teach morals and those that think that the Bible is a verbatim account of what really happened.

You left out a reasonably large third group.

IMO, if you accept the general story then Jesus was 33 when he died. Since the average lifespan in those days was well under 50, that would equate to later middle-aged. Kind of naive to assume no wife or kids, huh?

 

[Gonz]

Oh..and if Jesus had kids, perhaps he has grandkids and great-grand kids etc etc... there could be thousands of people living today who are direct descendants of Jesus.

Hey, what a great idea for a book & a movie.

Kind of naive to assume no wife or kids, huh?

Not if he is the actual physical son of God.

 

[Leslie]

^ lolz

 

[MrBishop]

You left out a reasonably large third group.

IMO, if you accept the general story then Jesus was 33 when he died. Since the average lifespan in those days was well under 50, that would equate to later middle-aged. Kind of naive to assume no wife or kids, huh?

...especially considering that he lived his life as a full human. It was unknown for any man to NOT marry in those days.

The reasonably large group is the atheists or practicers of other religions? If so, IMO..they believe that the Bible is nothing more than a list of parables to help teach morals, eh.

 

[SouthernN'Proud]

Not with a forty foot pole.

 

[chcr]

Not if he is the actual physical son of God.

...especially considering that he lived his life as a full human.

Rather the whole point of the story as I understand it.

The reasonably large group is the atheists or practicers of other religions? If so, IMO..they believe that the Bible is nothing more than a list of parables to help teach morals, eh.

No, I think most of us think the bible is a collection of myths, historical exaggerations and outright lies plagiarized from various religions that predate it and that it really has little if anything of a worthwhile or moral nature to teach us that wasn't taught long before there was a bible. If it ever was a moral guide (IMO it wasn't), it is 1500 years out of date.

I can't speak for followers of other religions but most atheists I know substantially agree with this.

 

[chcr]

Not with a forty foot pole.

You're evidently a lot more intelligent than most of us.

 

[MrBishop]

No, I think most of us think the bible is a collection of myths, historical exaggerations and outright lies plagiarized from various religions that predate it and that it really has little if anything of a worthwhile or moral nature to teach us that wasn't taught long before there was a bible. If it ever was a moral guide (IMO it wasn't), it is 1500 years out of date.

I can't speak for followers of other religions but most atheists I know substantially agree with this.

par·a·ble [par-uh-buhl]
–noun
1. a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
2. a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.

**
Whether it succeeds in teaching the reader it's moral lesson , or whether the moral is still valid is moot - that was it's intent. - Hence my use of the term parable.

 

[Altron]

It's the distrust in the interpretations that would be a big thing IMO.

Priests stay celibate because of Jesus' celibacy, eh

Oh..and if Jesus had kids, perhaps he has grandkids and great-grand kids etc etc... there could be thousands of people living today who are direct descendants of Jesus.

Wouldn't THAT be a kick in the head?

Imagine: Leslie, great-great-great-great-granddaughter of the son of God. How's THAT for a title

Episcopal reverends can have kids. It's just you other savages that can't.

 

[MrBishop]

Episcopal reverends can have kids. It's just you other savages that can't.

You mean the Roman Catholics?

 

[chcr]

par·a·ble [par-uh-buhl]
–noun
1. a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
2. a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.

**
Whether it succeeds in teaching the reader it's moral lesson , or whether the moral is still valid is moot - that was it's intent. - Hence my use of the term parable.

I know what a parable is.

See, I (and a lot of other atheists) disagree that that was ever the intent of the bible. The stories of the bible are not intended to teach moral lessons. They are intended to lay down the law according to those that wrote them. If you don't obey, you will be punished.

I don't intend to get into a big discussion on comparative theology, but this is what virtually all religious texts are intended to do.

Don't even get me started on truth. Truth, like morality, is strictly subjective.

 

[BB]

Imagine: Leslie, great-great-great-great-granddaughter of the son of God. How's THAT for a title

i know she has grey hair in her Av ...but she really couldn't be that old ...

... could she?

Don't even get me started on truth. Truth, like morality, is strictly subjective.

There are some people would disagree with that statement! (hang on ..isn't that a universal truth? ... chcr thus disappears in a puff of logic ! ...or was that the other fella? )