Am I the only person who looks at pictures of those big honkin’ ossuaries that purportedly have the bones of the whole Jesus clan and wonders if female ghosts are going to emerge and melt the heads of anyone opening them?
Anyone? Anyone else at all?
In case you’re not up on this, a documentary entitled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” produced by James Cameron–who is king of the world but not, so I’m told, king of the Jews–details the discovery of some bone boxes bearing the names of Joseph, Mary, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and…best of all…the latter two’s son. This has resulted in the expected reactions ranging from dispassionate curiosity to outrage over another perceived attack on Christianity, and everything in between. Naturally my own leanings are toward the dispassionate curiosity side: I find it interesting, but I simply don’t see how it’s possible to prove it definitively. Still, I have to admit I was in stitches over the comments of one Rev. David Knapp of Port Jefferson Station in Long Island who asserted:
“This is all hocus-pocus. Jesus died and rose from the dead and left the tomb and went up to heaven–and there were 500 witnesses to that, so there are no bones to be found. This is not going to shake our faith.”
It’s not the sentiment that breaks me up so much as the phrasing. The announcement of a scientific discovery, an archaeological find, is considered “hocus-pocus,” while the notion of rising from the dead, departing your burial place and being transported to heaven…a concept rooted in, at the very least, the supernatural, the uncanny, the magical…THAT he’s got no problem accepting.
I’m just really saddened that Jesus is no longer a character on “South Park.” They’d have a field day with this.
PAD
• 
It’s a little bit like intelligent design. The basic claim of the movie maker is that it is unlikely that these names would appear in the same family in this order of relationships.
I’ve seen this Jacobovici guy in a documentry aboutt he ten lost tribes, which was also a little fishy.
still, from an interview with the guy, he sure knows how to tell a story well. I’m not very happy that he is israeli born Jewish-Canadian. those dámņ canadians. The feeling is that the legitimate scholars are very cautious, almost too cautious, while this guy is not cautious enough.
Still, I think Christianity will survive this movie.
About 10 years ago a respected archelogist came out and said that there is no archeological evidence about the Exodus story, and that archeologists don’t think it ever happened. Caused a small stir and then it was over.
I have to admit, for me personally, the Christianity Today interview with James Cameron was very enlightening:
Um, Jim, you did see the word “satire” above the headline, right?
Kathleen pointed out an impressive thing: We’re 102 messages into a thread about Jesus and it hasn’t erupted into a flamewar. Everyone’s been really…what’s the word…civil. Nicely done, all.
PAD
Posted by: Den at March 2, 2007 08:24 AM
Um, Jim, you did see the word “satire” above the headline, right?
If he did miss it — and I’m not certain whether he did or he didn’t — I can’t fault him. The word “satire” was very, very small and easily missed. In fact, I missed it at first.
If he did miss it — and I’m not certain whether he did or he didn’t — I can’t fault him.
It seems obvious to me that it’s satire. But then, I think the size of the word “Satire” itself is large enough, if the actually content wasn’t enough to be able to figure it out.
So, I’m also on the “does Jim know it’s satire or not?” bandwagon.
But, having written for a satirical website for several years, you can say it in bright neon lights and some people still won’t figure it out. Or they’ll just get pìššëd and say they were duped.
Posted by: Craig J. Ries at March 2, 2007 11:34 AM
It seems obvious to me that it’s satire.
I thought it was satirical when I read it, which is why I scanned the page a second time for confirmation. But, y’know, all of us have brain cramps and miss the point of this or that from time to time. I try not to be judgmental for that reason.
Anyway, the truly interesting thing about this story to me is the way in which people will latch on to the thinnest of evidence to “prove” something they’ve already chosen to believe. Could the bones that are the focus of Cameron’s documentary be those of Jesus Christ? Possibly. From what I’ve read so far, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to rule it in… or out. The passage of two-plus millenia, and what that does to physical evidence and records, makes it impossible to know.
By the same token, I can’t rule out the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God, who died on the cross, descended into Hëll and then rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven in order to conquer death and give us the hope of eternal life. But people would be well-served to acknowledge that there is no conclusive evidence for this either, and that their belief is based on pure faith. After all, how do we know their were 500 witnesses to Christ’s resurrection? Because we were told that by the handful of people whose accounts actually survived the ravages of time? That’s not much evidence at all.
I realize that for a devout Christian, belief in the divinity of Christ is seen as a pre-requisite for achieving salvation. And I suspect that many might be offended by what I’m about to say, but I think it bears saying nonetheless: in my view it doesn’t matter whether the story of Christ’s resurrection is true or not. If a belief in Christ brings out the best in you, it’s a good belief. If it brings out the worst in you (and let’s face it, religion — any religion — can bring out the worst in certain people), then it’s a bad thing.
Personally, I’m less concerned with the truth of what happened to Jesus Christ after he was crucified, and more concerned with the other truths that I can “test.” For example, the Bible asserts that “he who is last shall come first and he who is first shall come last.” That truth changed my life. I’ve learned that humility is not only good for it’s own sake, but actually benefits the person who practices it in tangible ways.
But, hey, your mileage may vary. (Can I SAY that any more often…?)
Okay, so I won’t forget to put this in later, it could be that Iowa Jim’s comment in itself was intended as satire. (If it WASN’T, sorry, Jim.) Satire in the written word is a little harder to recognize than satire of the spoken word or visual medium for some people.
Bill Mulligan’s post up there with the Cross quote brings to mind two questions. If the onomasticon(try THAT for triple word score) is so small, in fact, when the ossuary was found, why wasn’t that taken into consideration? Thinking that way would lead me, at least, away from thinking that it’s Jesus and his family. Is this a case of the researchers keeping what they need and chucking the rest?
Okay, and the second question–if you’ve got these ossuaries, you think MIGHT hold the bones of Jesus, is your first choice to examine them going to be someone named Cross?
Bill Myers–No. I don’t think you CAN say that more often. You’ve gotten quite enough mileage out of it.
Ðámņ it, you’ve infected ME now.
Rereading Micha’s post up there kinda sums up the whole religion thing well. IS IT TRUE? Well, MAYBE, but is the STORY told well? And as for archaeologists saying that something never happened because there’s no evidence for it, to quote Belloq, archaeology is not an exact science. Just because there isn’t any evidence uncovered NOW doesn’t mean that there won’t be more uncovered later. They just found a headless statue of Hera in a Greek wall that apparently went with a statue of Zeus that nobody knew about. There is always more.
Herculaneum–here I thought that was what you make a radiocative Hercules from. Who knew?
I wasn’t sure if Jim knew whether or not it was satire, which is why I posed the question. His comment that it was “illuminating” makes me lean towards him not realizing it, but maybe he was being satirical himself. Hopefully, he’ll stop by again soon and clarify it.
As for the alleged bones of Jesus, it’s going to be impossible to prove one way or another. It’s not like we can run a DNA comparison, what with the Shroud of Turin turning out to be only about 500 years old. Even if there are other relics out there that are purported to have a sample of Jesus’ blood, it’s still scientifically impossible to prove their bona fides. So, we’re stuck with the idenfication of the names, which apparently is questionable and the statistical probability of more than one Yeshua bar Yosep’s connected to a Miriam from Magdala. From what I’ve read over the past week, given the limited number of names in circulation at that time and place, it isn’t all that improbable.
Posted by: Den at March 2, 2007 01:29 PM
I wasn’t sure if Jim knew whether or not it was satire, which is why I posed the question. His comment that it was “illuminating” makes me lean towards him not realizing it, but maybe he was being satirical himself. Hopefully, he’ll stop by again soon and clarify it.
Yeah, what Den said.
By the way, Iowa Jim, I know you are a devout Christian and suspect you may have a slightly different P.O.V. than some of the other Christians who have posted here. I’d be interested in your take on all this if you’d care to share it. We’re probably not gonna see eye-to-eye but that doesn’t mean I don’t wanna hear what you have to say.
I realize religion is a touchy subject for some — and for all I know it may be for you. After all, I don’t know you. But the water’s nice here and as Peter already mentioned, this thread has been chugging along good and well without any flaming going on. Can’t speak for anyone else, but if you’re interested in chiming in a bit more I’m interested in reading it.
“Bill Mulligan’s post up there with the Cross quote brings to mind two questions. If the onomasticon(try THAT for triple word score) is so small, in fact, when the ossuary was found, why wasn’t that taken into consideration? Thinking that way would lead me, at least, away from thinking that it’s Jesus and his family. Is this a case of the researchers keeping what they need and chucking the rest?”
When the cave was found back in the 80’s, it and its contents were treated with indifference, like any other burial cave. The ossuaries were catalgued and archived. If you are inclined to conspirancy theories, you could claim that they ignored it too much. It’s a little bit like he end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Only in the 90’s were these ossuaries described in publication, and without suggesting any connection to Jesus. the person who came up with the idea that it is Jesus’s family grave was the film maker, not the archeologits. He came to the Archeologist, who showed him the ossuaries, and he started asking questions and speculating. His theory is based on 3 assumptions:
1) That it is statistically unlikely that a Jesus son of Joseph, two Marys, a Mathew, and another Joseph wil be found in the same grave even if individualy they are common names.
2) That the name Mariamne (spl?) that appears on one of the ossuaries is usued in an ancient Christian text called the Acts of Philliip to refer to Mary Magdalene.
3) That, based on the DNA tyests Mariamne and the Jesus found in the grave were not genetically related, which he interprets to mean that they were married.
It’s a nice little hypothesis, but it could never go beyond a speculation. At the end all he has is the statistics.
As far as I can remember, there’s nothing in the Bible that says that Jesus ascended into Heavan and STAYED THERE. For all anyone knows, after lifting up to Heavan, he returned to live out his normal human lifespan with his family. Or maybe commuted back and forth.
Yeah, if you’d believe that than you’d be a … wait, then you’d be a Morman.
“Or maybe commuted back and forth.”
So, if He did, think he’d use the HOV lane? Think he’d get a ticket?
Something ELSE I was thinking about. We were talking before about how there isn’t much written, and maybe that’s because of illiteracy. Maybe, though, there’s a simpler answer. It could just be that the intellectuals didn’t want to waste their time writing about the military because they were writing for each other, and maybe they just didn’t have too much interest in the subject. It’s not like most Romans or anybody else had a heck of a lot of leisure time to begin with, so if there’s no audience, it ain’t getting produced for the audience.
Actually, most scribes wrote about whatever their patron wanted them to write. Caesar, for example, took a scribe with him in his conquest of Gaul to record his victory there.
Doo said: “What difference does it make how he died or if he was mortal or divine? It’s the MESSAGE he focused on.”
I think that’s a valid point, and I’ve addressed this point in other religious-themed threads. As I’ve mentioned in those threads, I’ll sometimes ask priests or brothers of my acquaintance whether irrefutable proof that Jesus died and stayed dead would negate the significance of his message of love and peace.
Myself, I don’t believe it would. Now, if the resurrection didn’t happen, then the whole thing about Jesus taking on the burden of our collective sins (stupid, stupid Adam and Eve creatures!) never happened; but that’s a separate issue.
I, personally, don’t care whether Jesus was really divine, some guy named Karl on a time-travelling search for “truth”, or the subject of a bit of posthumous spin by his followers. I’m more interested in what the man had to say (or what was attributed to him). I think one reason people of various religions respect Jesus is because his message of peace and brotherhood was so universal.
Speaking of Karl (the protagonist of Michael Moorcock’s Behold the Man), it’s interesting how often speculative fiction has addressed religious themes (both positively and negatively). This past summer, I wrote a series of three articles called “Speculative Fiction as Metaphor.” Part 2 dealt with SF and religion (part 1 dealt with politics and part 3 with SF as modern mythology).
I seriously doubt we’ll ever positively identify Jesus’ remains, so the question of his divinity will remain one of faith; but again, I’m more interested in his message than his birthright.
Rick
“It’s not like most Romans or anybody else had a heck of a lot of leisure time to begin with.”
Actually, many of the cultural acheivements of the Greek and Roman societies was the result of the leisure the rich had thanks to slavery. The greek word for leisure is schola.
It seems likely to me that people like Caesar or historians would focus on things that enhanced the greatness of the great people like Caesar, or of the Roman people as a whole, less than on something technical like routine tactics, which has more to do with common people. Even more so since the Romans, I was told, were pretty conservative on the tactical level. Although, this is only what I suspect, I’m no expert. Still, I’m sure a lot was written about the Roman military by modern historians, and the ancient also refer to it. And the romans and greeks wrote about a lot of things. So there might be more info out there. It is also possible that books written about military strategy were lost in the middle ages — a monk scratched the last copy of parchment to make room for a religious text. You’ll have to do more research to find out about it.
——————
“Speaking of Karl (the protagonist of Michael Moorcock’s Behold the Man), it’s interesting how often speculative fiction has addressed religious themes (both positively and negatively). This past summer, I wrote a series of three articles called “Speculative Fiction as Metaphor.” Part 2 dealt with SF and religion (part 1 dealt with politics and part 3 with SF as modern mythology).”
I’ll be interested to hear more about that. The article itself if you have a link, or E-mail to me. I’ve read Moorcock, but not the book you mention.
Micha wrote: “I’ll be interested to hear more about that. The article itself if you have a link, or E-mail to me. I’ve read Moorcock, but not the book you mention.”
I can E-Mail you a PDF of the article. Just let me know the E-Mail address.
Rick
My address is mroded@yahoo.com
Herculaneum–here I thought that was what you make a radioactive Hercules from. Who knew?
The most exciting part of the city is the villa of papyri: (from wiki)
The most famous of the luxurious villas at Herculaneum is the “Villa of the Papyri” now identified as the magnificent seafront retreat for Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, Julius Caesar’s father-in-law. It stretches down towards the sea in four terraces. Piso, a literate man who patronized poets and philosophers, built there a fine library, the only one to survive intact from antiquity. Scrolls from the villa are stored at the National Library, Naples. The scrolls are badly carbonized, but a large number have been unrolled, with varying degrees of success. Computer-enhanced multi-spectral imaging, in the infra-red range, helps make the ink legible. There is now a real prospect that it will be possible to read the unopened scrolls using X-rays.[1] The same techniques could be applied to the scrolls waiting to be discovered in the as-yet unexcavated part of the villa, removing the need for potentially damaging the unrolled scrolls.
One can only hope that some of the lost classics will be rediscovered. We know virtually none of Sappho’s work and many of the other Greek poets and playwrights are known by mere fragments of their works. It would be wonderful to have these irreplaceable works returned to our consciousness.
I think it unlikely that the Romans were very different from us in the desire to relive days of glory–one imagines that anyone who fought with Scipio at Zama never tired of telling the story of how he helped end the threat of Hannibal. You’d think books on such subjects would be the equivalent of today’s best sellers, but so far no luck.
The very idea of ancient hand to hand combat is so horrific that it boggles the mind. What it actually looks like is something that can, thankfully, only be imagined.
Being a Christian, the religion leaves more questions than answers. I have been to many different services, though I have never been to Jewish or Muslim services(Mormons are odd). When I pray to God it feels right. When some preachers have you pray to Jesus, it feels not wrong, but maybe out of place. I truly believe Jesus is the messenger and the road to God. Was he resurrected? (The Muslims beleived he faked his death, so they are probably loving this.) I say yes, because when I doubt miracles and the such I remember with God all things are possible.
Has anybody read Norse myths beyond Thor comic books? I put out the question, Is Balder God? When Ragnarok occurred, was he not resurrected when Hel opened up? Just a question. I have others, too… Were the “gods” fallen angels?
Also, the Troy analogy: read the book, “Where Troy Once Stood”.
Bill, you’ll have to read about Roman literature and historiography in order to get a better impression of what styles were written, by whom and for whom. This might answer your question and maybe give you a clue to possible primary sources about the Roman military. I don’t know if the Romans had action-literatre like the medieval people had, or maybe they got enough action in the gladiator ring and the the theaters. They certainly put much value in the glory of their ancestors, but I don’t know if it was written down.
“Were the “gods” fallen angels?”
In the early middle ages Christians thought of pagan gods as actual demons.
In the old testament (Genesis for one) there are references to the Sons of God who marry human women and birth giants.
The Muslims respect Jesus as a prophet but reject the idea that he was god.
I am a Christian, but sometimes (oftentimes?), I find myself embarrassed. Not by Christ, but by his followers. The Reverend Knapp, if he were a thinking man, should realize that the resurrection of Christ is the defining event of the faith. Finding the bones of Christ should be the ONE AND ONLY thing to shake his faith.
From what I have read, this is pop archeology and makes for good television, but not good science, so I’m not worried in the least.
Mr. David, I’ve been a fan of your Star Trek novels for years. Keep up the great work.
Iowa Jim, you are aware that article was satirical, correct?
Yes. That is why I liked it. The article’s sarcasm illustrated the absurdity of what Cameron is claiming. It doesn’t disprove it, but it does illustrate why I don’t think Cameron has proved his point.
Iowa Jim
By the way, Iowa Jim, I know you are a devout Christian and suspect you may have a slightly different P.O.V. than some of the other Christians who have posted here. I’d be interested in your take on all this if you’d care to share it.
My point of view is simple. I don’t blindly accept Jesus died and rose again, but I recognize (as PAD mentions) that it is a bold (some would say absurd) idea. I think there are strong historical reasons to believe it happened, but as with any historical event, it either did or it did not. You have to look at the evidence and decide for yourself. In this case, I believe there is also a spiritual element. As a Christian, I have found this to be true in practice, but obviously that is subjective.
The reality is this is not the first time someone has claimed to find the bones of Jesus. At this point, it would be virtually impossible to prove their case. I am not being stubborn, but just realistic. In this particular case, to say the evidence is weak is to be kind. Thus why I thought the satire was the best response.
Because it is an event 2000 years ago, you can’t judge this the same way as whether 9/11 happened (or whether Elvis is still alive). Because of the religious issues, faith (meaning “trust” in both personal and historical evidence, not “blind acceptance”) is involved as well. I am convince Jesus is alive, but that is something each of you have to decide for yourselves.
Iowa Jim
Scientific American article.
The statistican really said that there were likely to be 1 in 600 families with that pattern of name. He never gave odds on the likelihood it was Jesus.
I have found two historical figures for the population of Jerusalem around the year 70. Josephus says 3 million. Tacitus 600,000. Using Tacitus’ figure, the 1/600 estimate, and a high average of 12 family members, we can estimate 42 families with that name pattern. Since Tactitus’ figure is the low figure, and 12 family members is probably high, the number of families with that name pattern is likely higher than 42.
But I like the #42 anyway.
” (or whether Elvis is still alive).”
Some of you might be aware that I make videos. I want to make one, two lovebirds parking in a forest. Suddenly, there’s a brilliant blue-white light from overhead. Several greys walk to the car, abduct the couple, then once aboard the ship, the head Grey tells them, “We have a message for your race. You will deliver it to your leaders. Elvis is dead. We don’t have him. Get over it.”
Gonna make that one of these days.
I loved this whole thing, but I was disappointed in the public media reaction (generally, shock and denial, defensive spin overdrive). I’m Christian, but that means you’re following a tradition of thought, not that you necessarily believe a physical body rose from the grave and floated off into the sky never to fall to earth again. This might not be 100% provable, but it’s proven to be far, far more likely true than not. The grave itself is like confirmation for me, validation.
All the church’s (well, Roman Empire’s population control official state religion’s and the right wing movements that have built from it’s) teaching against Christ’s original message can now be debunked. The Gospel of Mary is supported by this find, the Acts of Phillip, generally the teachings of the original (Gnostic) Cristian cult, who were all but hunted to extinction and effectively erased from history for centuries by Constantine’s state church, as heretics. This tradition teaches equality and the spirit as universal and personal, rather than as some master with whip and carrot at the top of an Earthly heirarchy, Jesus as a brother of the spirit rather than Lord and Master (freedom from Earthly oppression and rule), and Mary Magdaline as an equal partner (wife, likely, the word translating to “companion”, and one of the founders of the first Christian church and missionary) rather than an unclean whørë (subjugation of women). If Christians would embrace this rather than attack it and recoil, the perversion of Christianity, that’s been used to such vile effect again and again for centuries, could be undone going forward. That’s how I feel, anyway, as a Christian. 🙂 I’m happy with this. And, bonus, my birth year is the tomb discovery year. lol
One other thing: Something that just astonishes me is that the documentary also shows the documentarians finding a Book of “Judah” in the tomb when they revisit. I would expect, as this is the book Jesus points to as his message, where one should look for answers and clarity of his teachings, that *somebody* out there would be looking to get back in the tomb to verify that this book of Judah actually is there, or debunk it by proving it’s not, and if it is, I would expect there to be serious fervor for the translation and publishing of this book. More strange than anything about this, to me, is that I’ve yet to hear mention of this claim in the debate at all, either pro or con. Why?
“Because the idea of faith as an alternative to evidence only came after people started doubting the evidence. It was only then that people started saying, look, this is not about evidence and reason, it’s about faith.”
Physical “Evidence” and spiritual “faith” are conduits for totally different things. Each supports the other and without one the other is totally useless.
Neither is a substitution for the other.
All the things that archeology can prove about Biblical accuracy can’t prove anything about how accurate the Bible is or isn’t about God or the Messiah, or even whether or not that stuff is hooey. On the other hand, that archeology provides a manner for people of today to believe in the background for the stuff of yesterday makes it easier for people to believe in tales of yesterday, even when the archaeological stuff provides stuff that is less than concrete.
Besides, if there is knowledge that I can’t understand or interpret in any given subject, then only my faith in a respective and relevant authority is what allows me to believe the knowledge. For all my personal experience can tell me, Calculus either works or it is a product of a deranged conspiracy. But my faith in math teachers is what makes me believe that Calculus, which I did not learn, is a useful tool for stuff.
History and geography works the same way actually: it’s about faith in your sources.
Faith does not support evidence. Evidence rises or falls on its own.
But my faith in math teachers is what makes me believe that Calculus, which I did not learn, is a useful tool for stuff.
Actually, math is a useful tool whether your have faith in your teachers or not. Of course, you have to actually apply it correctly. Otherwise, you get Martian probes crashing. That’s beauty of all the sciences. They look at reality and, as someone once said, reality is what still exists even when you stop believing in it.
I always find it amusing when people who insist that a book written thousands of years ago has to be the literal truth, despite all the fossil evidence in front of our eyes, lectures me on how I’m taking evolution on “faith”. Um, no, I’m looking at reality. Calling reality “faith” doesn’t make it stop being reality.