I find this fascinating. I think the statisticians analysis may be very complelling. I mean, if they translated the inscriptions on the caskets correctly, what are the odds that you would have caskets in the same tomb labeled Joseph, Mary, James-Son of Joseph, Jesus-Son of Joseph, and Mary all dating to the correct period, even if those specific names were common at the time?
what are the odds that you would have caskets in the same tomb labeled Joseph, Mary, James-Son of Joseph, Jesus-Son of Joseph, and Mary all dating to the correct period, even if those specific names were common at the time? What did Mark twain say about statistics? RC dating, iirc, can only get the date to a 50 year range, which should open up the possiblities. The average life span back then was 25ish. Thus, if RC yielded a range of 30-80 BCE, we could be talking Jesus or just as easily his grandson. Shoot just looking at the bones may reveal if any of the above died of old age. For all we know Jesus died of old age on the cross
Joseph was buried before Jesus died. John was responsible for the burial of Mary. His brothers were named James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas. James died in Jerusalem and was buried by the early followers of Jesus. Jesus was placed in the tomb of a rich man named Joseph and by eye witness acounts was not placed in a casket.
this is fascinating, sounds like this documentary team did some solid work to tie up all the loose end. this won't change anyone's mind that jesus rose from the dead and all that but it is still interesting and a little weird. weird in that they found all those names in one tomb................
This is interesting from an archaeologica/historical standpoint, and it's surely going to be used in the culture wars, but no one's gonna give up their religion based on this. If there is actually new information here I'd definitely like to know it - the past tends to grow murkier the farther back we go, and this sort of discovery really takes us a long way into understanding how our ancestors lived.
Rhester I assume you are using the Bible, and any extra biblical sources, that support the biblical version, as your authority on this subject. It is a matter of faith for you. Please correct me if I am wrong. I am not confined by those restrictions. I believe that Jesus did exist as a historical figure (there is ample evidence to support this). I am even open to the idea that Jesus was the son of God in some special way beyond which all men are the son of God. However, I do not consider the Bible to be even close to infallible or literally true. I will go where the evidence leads. Even if the events you describe above are accurate, this would not preclude the possibility that the bodies were gathered together and reinterned in a tomb at a later date.
The date range depends on the age of the material. For something that is only 2000 years old, the range is closer to 10 years. There are also multiple dating techniques and I have not seen where the method was specified.
It is a matter of faith for you and I both. A theory will be made, evidence offered and yet logic, history and experience tells me we will be left with a choice to believe, not a decision to accept irrefutible absolutes. Finding the bones of Jesus, the ark of the convenant, Noah's ark, The Shroud of Turin, the Holy Grail, Excaliber, the Missing Link and Solomon's Wisdom is interesting, but I would rather know for certain who shot JFK. But I definately would watch the show if I didn't believe in Jesus' resurrection. Don't know if I will be able to catch it, please post what is presented if possible. Thanks
No, it is not a matter of faith for me. If compelling evidence was presented that confirmed a biblical account of an event I would tend to believe it. If compelling evidence was presented that contradicts a biblical account of an event, I would tend to believe it. To use the word "faith" to describe this perspective distorts the meaning of the word to the point where it is meaningless.
Are we sure Cameron found the actual tomb? I mean...it could have been an HISD cafeteria worker who was baking cookies while on vacation in the middle east. Could be the image of a tomb on a baking pan, right?
This makes no difference because the bible thumpers will just disregard the evidence even if it is legit. The churches have too much at stake to give any credence to it.
I just don't understand why Christians would feel that because Jesus' physical body wasn't resurrected it somehow is a blight on their faith. If his soul rises to heaven then isn't that just as good? And if he had a son ~ why is that such a bad thing? He wasn't a priest you know...
That would mean * that not everything in The Bible was literally true * that God was only kidding about some of the things in His Word * everybody would get to make up their mind what was true and what was not so true
This happens so often already. I don't believe the bible mentions abortion at all. Or the Republican party. Or Teletubbies.
