Jesus had a son named Judah and was buried alongside Mary Magdalene, according to a new documentary by Hollywood film director James Cameron. The film examines a tomb found near Jerusalem in 1980 which producers say belonged to Jesus and his family. Speaking in New York, the Oscar-winning Titanic director said statistical tests and DNA analysis backed this view.
But Mr Cameron's claim has been attacked by archaeologists and theologians as unfounded.
Archaeologists said that the burial cave was probably that of a Jewish family with similar names to that of Jesus.
But Mr Cameron said the combination of names found on the tombs convinced him of their heritage.
Samples tested Israeli construction workers building an apartment complex in Jerusalem's East Talpiot district first uncovered 10 of the 2,000-year-old ossuaries - or limestone coffins - in a tomb in March 1980.
According to the Israel Antiquities Authority, six of those coffins were marked with the names Mary; Matthew; Jesua son of Joseph; Mary; Jofa (Joseph, Jesus' brother); and Judah son of Jesua.
Another grave said by producers to be of Mary Magdalene convinced researchers of the truth of their find, Mr Cameron said at a New York news conference.
Unveiling his documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus, Mr Cameron said the chances of finding that combination of names together was like finding a grave marked Ringo next to others marked John, Paul and George.
"Mariamene is Mary Magdalene - that's the Ringo, that's what sets this whole film in motion," he said.
Christian contradiction? The documentary asserts that tests on samples from two of the coffins show Jesus and Mary Magdalene were likely to have been buried in them and were a couple.
The film-makers used this finding to claim that the coffin marked "Judah son of Jesua" contains the son of Jesus and Mary.
But they said the discovery of the tomb does not undermine the key Christian belief that Jesus was resurrected three days after his death.
Academic Stephen Pfann, a scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem, said he did not expect Christians to accept the film's findings.
"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," said Mr Pfann, who was interviewed by the film-makers.
"But sceptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."
Findings refuted Israeli archaeologist Amos Kloner, who was among the first to examine the tomb when it was first discovered, said the names marked on the coffins were very common at the time.
"I don't accept the news that it was used by Jesus or his family," he told the BBC News website.
"The documentary filmmakers are using it to sell their film."
Mr Cameron showed two of the coffins at the news conference.
"It doesn't get bigger than this," he said in an earlier press release.
"We've done our homework; we've made the case; and now it's time for the debate to begin."
Local residents told the BBC News website they were pleased with the attention the tomb has drawn.
"It will mean our house prices will go up because Christians will want to live here," one woman said.
linkTechnorati Tags:
jesus tomb, ex-christian, exchristian, history, atheism
We can only hope they will all make their way there.
LMAO!!!!!
This reminds me of the ossuary found that had 'Jesus son of Joseph" inscribed on it and it turned out the inscription was forged.
Has anyone confirmed that the names were not added AFTER the first century by those who would want to "help" history along by creating the evidence (since none existed in the first place)?
If the names ARE legit and if these ossuaries DO date to the 30s or 40s of the first century then it is a more interesting issue. Otherwise, Cameron saw Gibson's "Passion" and said oh my, we can make easy money off these folks. Cmon, 27 year old news is suddenly a documentary? Who did the documentary of it in the 80s? If not, why not?
Also, why do we have no record WHATSOEVER of tomb veneration regarding Jesus' tomb since:
a) he rose from the dead in it
b) it was a well-known tomb if we believe a rich man owned it (Joseph of Arimethea)
c) the women and apostles knew the whereabouts of it if we believe the common gospel accounts that the women found the tomb empty
d) tomb veneration (visiting a tomb of a dead person) was already common at that time
e) what better tomb to venerate than a risen Lord?
Nope. There was no Jesus. Sorry.
Tim
Don't look for anything at all out of all this. Jesus was a myth but holds such power that the truth will never be known. Thanks to the cretins.
However, this will be a very unbeliveable script, because the reality of space aliens out there or computers becoming so smart they can be a threat to human beings is far more realistic than believing in a poor, ordinary man who rose from the dead and sits on top of the clouds.
Holy jizm batman. How did they get God's DNA?
Seriously, I read about these ossuaries last year.
This time of year, (you know when jesus comes out of the tomb and sees his shadow), always brings out jesbus stuff by the tons, and I guess it was time to resurrect this story :)
My Newsweek magazine came today and low and behold the article was in it. Among other things, Cameron and crew are trying to prove that the "James brother of Jesus" box found a few years ago in Akron Ohio? (sheesh) also came from the tomb in Talpiot, making them one big happy holy family. It also hinted that perhaps vandals of the tomb helped the story along by faking the "holy family" names on the boxes. Hmmm.
The human remains (note they said human)in the boxes were turned over to authorities and given a proper jewish burial as soon as they were taken from the boxes in 1980. How convenient, now we'll never know if it was really jesbus. LOL
Btw, The DNA samples done on the human remains left in the boxes, was to prove that Mary M. and Jesus were not related, thus meaning they could have been husband and wife, and the parents of Judas, although I thought they could do just about anything with their next of kin back in those days.
Oh well, I like this kind of stuff even though I realize it is a crock of bullshit.
It said that this couldn't be a family tomb of Jesus because such a family tomb would be in Nazareth (or I'd say maybe Bethlehem, according to the legend) where the family originates.
Also the James Ossuary is a confirmed hoax, so trying to link this to that would a bad move for their credibility.
They'll have photos and DNA to prove it too.
Just purely in conversational mode, but some scholars believe there actually was an historical Robin Hood. Some give his name as Robert Hood, or Robert Hod.
His consort's name was Madelyn Fitzwalter, a Norman woman. After taking up with a Saxon outlaw, she concealed her identity as "Marian" in order to spare her family the shame of her treason.
And no, by god, I am not trying to sneak in some proof of jesus. This business of "you can't prove he wasn't" is childish, if not idiotic.
If there was indeed an empty jesus tomb, it would have been venerated. The standard comeback is that when jesus rose, the empty tomb would have been meaningless, and hence forgotten. Bunk. Those who want me to believe in their empty tomb, show me where it is. Otherwise, clam it up and go back to your beads and rattles and leave this site in peace.
Have a nice day, jim. We are showing 40 degrees here but the weather guy keeps saying rain, of all things.
Archaeological finds have a habit of not matching up with the bible, so it’s worth having a look at this at least, if only to confirm the scepticism.
Here are just some of the questions that need answering:
Is the DNA analysis from the ossuaries trustworthy? Why did they allow the bones to be buried in 1980? And why can’t they just dig them up again?
Does ‘Mariamene’ really mean ‘Mary Magdalene'?
Are the tomb and ossuaries definitely 1st Century? Are the inscriptions 1st Century?
Are the film-makers really stupid enough to believe that if they actually did find a box full of Jesus’s bones this 'doesn't undermine the key Christian belief that Jesus was resurrected three days after his death’?
Are sales of the ‘Da Vinci Code’ finally beginning to tail off? (just kidding!)
These are the questions to ask, not: ‘Does this discovery match up with what it says in the bible?’
Some examples:
Ras Tafari
Mohammed
Joseph Smith
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneersohn
So don't completely write off the idea that the religion was based on some real-life teacher that may have been buried with his parents. Who really knows? Either way, I don't think this thing can be completely proven or disproven.
Lee
He also said that the material was badly decomposed and that there wasn't much he could do with it.
- He did not test the DNA of the "child" of the couple.
- The testing did not include finding out if the two individuals were of the opposite sex, so they don't even know if one is a man and the other a woman.
To me, it all smells fishier by the second!
Wow, 40 degrees and rain. Misery. I was out in Georgia digging for artifacts yesterday and it was about 78 degrees.
It really gets to me when I see all the hoopla about Jebus. What a guy, huh. He and his mom are showing up these days in the strangest of places. I guess it would be a hoot if it weren't so serious.
If Jebus had a daughter, she would have been entombed with her husband, not her birth family, so this does not rule her out.
I could have sucked up the director's version of the tomb, except his argument fell to pieces in the first part of the show. What really conviced me the show was smoke and mirrors-filled theory about the tomb, was the last part of the show in which the Director tried to make the connection between the tomb of Jesus and the supposed tomb (ostuary) of James brother of Jesus, which was found by archeologist (and under litigation for fraud the man who sold it and the man who bought it) to be a fraud, where the inscription does not match the period in which the person was buried but carved in many, many years later. If the Director is ever able to do a DNA swab of that ostuary and it matches the one found in the tomb of Jesus (as a relative) and also the supposed Mary mother of Jesus ostuary, then I will have a better opinion of this piece of work.
Regardless, it doesn't really matter. Even if there was a man named Jesus from which all the myths were born, the real man was just one of many apocalyptic messiah figures roaming the countryside and was only a man. The magically fantastic stories written long after his death/disappearance are stories written by those who were already calling themselves Christians and were writing things to help keep Christians in the faith. The Gospels were, in effect, apologetic works.
And, there were MANY Gospels. Not all early Christians believed in an actual physical Jesus and not all early Christians believed that Jesus was divine. Justin Martyr, in all his prolific writings from those early days, not once mentions the godhood of Jesus. There is no presentation in Justin's works that imply he believed Jesus was equal to God, i.e., part of some mystical trinity.
Anyway, good luck with studying the history and development of Christianity. It will do wonders for your faith.
That's an interesting assertion. In order to make such a statement, I'm assuming you are intimately familiar with the positions that you claim are "full of holes", for how else could you make such a statement? Could you please take a moment and summarize what those positions are? At least mention one or two of the common arguments for ahistoricity that you think are weak, so I have some idea of what you are referring to specifically. For your convenience, here are a few links to sites that summarize some of the current (skeptical) thinking about the historicity of Jesus. I'm guessing that the arguments you think are "full of holes" can be found among these, but please correct me if I'm wrong:
Historicity of Jesus
The Jesus Puzzle
The Rubicon Analogy
etghadminvolunteer: "There is as much a secular basis for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth as there is for Julius Caesar or Plato."
Really?! Before we go much further, I'd be very curious to hear how you reached that opinion. Did you lay out the evidence for Jesus and Julius Caesar, side-by-side, and compare them? Are you referring the opinion of somebody else, whom you trust, who undertook this exercise? Did you consult differing opinions on the weight of certain evidence? Please do elaborate a bit, if you would.
etghadminvolunteer: "Whether you choose to believe the claims of Jesus or his followers is academic to the historical fact that he did live in Judea in the applicable time period."
Absolutely. That is a clear and succinct statement of the obvious.
etghadminvolunteer: "Don’t let your aversions to Christianity dilute your ability to reason or dispute the obvious."
Sage advice indeed! Allow me to echo it. Don't let your affections for Christianity dilute your ability to reason. Now that we agree on that point, let's hear what specific evidence you have for the existence of a historical Jesus. I'm particularly interested in the extrabiblical evidence you think is compelling. No doubt the Testimonium Falvium is at the top of your list, right? What else?
Let us also not forget that there ARE books that talk about Jesus other than the books in the Bible.
What books would you be referring to?
By the way, the Jews only count 24 books of the OT, and of course the Catholics add 5 more. So, the "Bible" ranges from 24 - 71 books, depending on who you ask.
Just thought you'd like to know.