Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

(CBS News) JERUSALEM An Oscar-winning director is about to challenge the most elemental tenets of Christianity in a documentary on The Discovery Channel, claiming the bones of Jesus Christ and his closest relatives were found in a Jerusalem tomb in 1980.

James Cameron's "The Lost Tomb of Christ," which the Discovery Channel will run on March 4, argues that 10 ancient ossuaries - small caskets used to store bones - discovered in a suburb of Jerusalem in 1980 may have contained the bones of Jesus and his family, according to a press release issued by the Discovery Channel.

One of the caskets even bears the title, "Judah, son of Jesus," hinting that Jesus may have had a son. And the very fact that Jesus had an ossuary would contradict the Christian belief that he was resurrected and ascended to heaven.

But CBS News correspondent Mark Philips reports that, although archeologists have long argued over the factual and historic accuracy of Christianity's version of history, in this case, the archeological establishment has lined up to label this claim as bunk.

Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.

"They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.

"What's the story, they found the DNA connecting Jesus to God? Can you check the DNA of god," Kloner, seen at left, sarcastically asked during an interview for the CBS News Early Show.

Cameron said his critics should withhold comment until they see his film.

"I'm not a theologist. I'm not an archaeologist. I'm a documentary film maker," he said.

The tomb bears the names Jesus, Mary and Joseph and one of the caskets even bears the title, "Judah, son of Jesus," hinting that Jesus may have had a son. But scientists argue the names were extremely common during that time period, and in no way prove the Jesus buried at the site was Jesus Christ.

Another researcher whose work has focused on the Middle East, biblical anthropologist Joe Zias, has dismissed Cameron's claims as "dishonest".

"It has nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus, he was known as Jesus of Nazareth, not Jesus of Jerusalem, and if the family was wealthy enough to afford a tomb, which they probably weren't, it would have been in Nazareth, not here in Jerusalem," he said.

He said the appearance of the names proved nothing.

Cameron told NBC'S "Today" show that statisticians found "in the range of a couple of million to one in favor of it being them." Simcha Jacobovici, the Toronto filmmaker who directed the documentary, said the implications "are huge."

"But they're not necessarily the implications people think they are. For example, some believers are going to say, well this challenges the resurrection. I don't know why, if Jesus rose from one tomb, he couldn't have risen from the other tomb," Jacobovici told "Today."

Most Christians believe Jesus' body was laid for three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City.

The burial site identified in Cameron's documentary is in the southern Jerusalem neighborhood of Talpiyot, nowhere near the church.

The film's claims have also raised the ire of Christian leaders in the Holy Land.

"The historical, religious and archaeological evidence show that the place where Christ was buried is the Church of the Resurrection," said Attallah Hana, a Greek Orthodox clergyman in Jerusalem. The documentary, he said, "contradicts the religious principles and the historic and spiritual principles that we hold tightly to."

Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight.

"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."

"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 - 10 being completely possible - it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."

After its debut in New York, "The Lost Tomb of Christ" will be shown on the international Discovery Channel, Canada's Vision, Channel 4 in Britain and Channel 8 in Israel.

This is the second time The Discovery Channel has been involved in a disputed claim about an ancient tomb, reports Phillips. The man at the center of the previous case is now facing trial for forgery.

(© 2007 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. )

Tha Tweezrrr wrote:THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!

Predaprince wrote:How do we know that Judah's father is Jesus Christ the son of God? Perhaps Judah's father is Jesus Martinez.



Anyway, why do I get the same sicking feeling from Cameron's statements there as I do from Bay's on the TF movie?

"I'm a film maker. I make movies. They don't have to follow set religious beliefs or historical statements. My critics should watch the movie and see this."

Blah, blah, blah.

I'm sick and tired of people creating an outlet for their opinions (such as these films) and then trying to slither out of criticism. Either back-up your ideas or keep them to yourself.

Shadowman wrote:

Predaprince wrote:How do we know that Judah's father is Jesus Christ the son of God? Perhaps Judah's father is Jesus Martinez.



Anyway, why do I get the same sicking feeling from Cameron's statements there as I do from Bay's on the TF movie?

"I'm a film maker. I make movies. They don't have to follow set religious beliefs or historical statements. My critics should watch the movie and see this."

Blah, blah, blah.

I'm sick and tired of people creating an outlet for their opinions (such as these films) and then trying to slither out of criticism. Either back-up your ideas or keep them to yourself.

They found His remains.

They did DNA testing.

It's Him alright.

Tha Tweezrrr wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Predaprince wrote:How do we know that Judah's father is Jesus Christ the son of God? Perhaps Judah's father is Jesus Martinez.



Anyway, why do I get the same sicking feeling from Cameron's statements there as I do from Bay's on the TF movie?

"I'm a film maker. I make movies. They don't have to follow set religious beliefs or historical statements. My critics should watch the movie and see this."

Blah, blah, blah.

I'm sick and tired of people creating an outlet for their opinions (such as these films) and then trying to slither out of criticism. Either back-up your ideas or keep them to yourself.

They found His remains.

They did DNA testing.

It's Him alright.

I have a question, not to dispute, I believe it's him too! But... How the hell do they have Jesus' DNA on record anyway?

Bluebullet wrote:I don't believe that. Jesus died and rose from the grave. As experts have said, after Jesus ascended to heaven, many people named their children Jesus and other biblical names. It was a purposly made coincidence that a father was named Judah and he named his son Jesus. As a Chistian, I will continue to believe what I believe and nothing will convince me otherwise.

Operation Ravage wrote:I refuse to even acknowledge this.

1.) Source material. Yeah, sure, let me take the word of a guy who makes movies about sinking ships and alien bugs over devoted religious scholars who have been studying this for decades.

Alpha Strike wrote:

Bluebullet wrote:I don't believe that. Jesus died and rose from the grave. As experts have said, after Jesus ascended to heaven, many people named their children Jesus and other biblical names. It was a purposly made coincidence that a father was named Judah and he named his son Jesus. As a Chistian, I will continue to believe what I believe and nothing will convince me otherwise.

And that my friends is faith.

Autobot032 wrote:

Alpha Strike wrote:

Bluebullet wrote:I don't believe that. Jesus died and rose from the grave. As experts have said, after Jesus ascended to heaven, many people named their children Jesus and other biblical names. It was a purposly made coincidence that a father was named Judah and he named his son Jesus. As a Chistian, I will continue to believe what I believe and nothing will convince me otherwise.

And that my friends is faith.

I agree with him, and we're entitled to that. Thank you very much.

Believe how you want, let us do the same, that's all I ask, and I'm sure that's all Bluebullet asks as well.

But CBS News correspondent Mark Philips reports that, although archeologists have long argued over the factual and historic accuracy of Christianity's version of history, in this case, the archeological establishment has lined up to label this claim as bunk.

3) all cameron really has to back up his allegations are the names, all of which were fairly common back in the day. for the record, jesus' original hebrew name was "yeshua," and even just looking through the bible you can find reference to other individuals with the same name (usually written "jeshua"). especially considering the mountain of archaeological and historical evidence against him, that makes for an extremely flimsy claim.

Alpha Strike wrote:

Tha Tweezrrr wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Predaprince wrote:How do we know that Judah's father is Jesus Christ the son of God? Perhaps Judah's father is Jesus Martinez.



Anyway, why do I get the same sicking feeling from Cameron's statements there as I do from Bay's on the TF movie?

"I'm a film maker. I make movies. They don't have to follow set religious beliefs or historical statements. My critics should watch the movie and see this."

Blah, blah, blah.

I'm sick and tired of people creating an outlet for their opinions (such as these films) and then trying to slither out of criticism. Either back-up your ideas or keep them to yourself.

They found His remains.

They did DNA testing.

It's Him alright.

I have a question, not to dispute, I believe it's him too! But... How the hell do they have Jesus' DNA on record anyway?

You can't, there is nothing that has been authentically identified as belonging to Jesus. Shroud of Turin, sorry bubkis, thats more red okur and carbon scaring. The great hanky of antico? Sorry that was proven to be the Security Guard Jim's umm stuff. Overall there is no way to DNA test for Jesus Christ. They can test the bodies and find out if they are related, but thats about all they can determine.

Faceful of Kitchen wrote:

Autobot032 wrote:

Alpha Strike wrote:

Bluebullet wrote:I don't believe that. Jesus died and rose from the grave. As experts have said, after Jesus ascended to heaven, many people named their children Jesus and other biblical names. It was a purposly made coincidence that a father was named Judah and he named his son Jesus. As a Chistian, I will continue to believe what I believe and nothing will convince me otherwise.

And that my friends is faith.

I agree with him, and we're entitled to that. Thank you very much.

Believe how you want, let us do the same, that's all I ask, and I'm sure that's all Bluebullet asks as well.

believing what you want is one thing (and i happen to believe the same thing), but a post like bluebullet's conforms to the worst stereotypes about christians. rather that use reason, his argument is "that can't be true because it doesn't conform to my existing beliefs," which is just an all-around stupid argument to make, especially when there are so many existing flaws in the claim:

1)

But CBS News correspondent Mark Philips reports that, although archeologists have long argued over the factual and historic accuracy of Christianity's version of history, in this case, the archeological establishment has lined up to label this claim as bunk.

i'll take the word of the experts over james cameron's any day. i'm not going to list all the evidence they presented, as it's in the original article, but i think the truth is pretty obvious.

2) the tomb was discovered in 1980. don't you think that if there was actually a reasonable chance that it was his tomb there would have been a bigger deal made about it before a washed-up hollywood hack decided to say it was over a quarter of a century later?

3) all cameron really has to back up his allegations are the names, all of which were fairly common back in the day. for the record, jesus' original hebrew name was "yeshua," and even just looking through the bible you can find reference to other individuals with the same name (usually written "jeshua"). especially considering the mountain of archaeological and historical evidence against him, that makes for an extremely flimsy claim.

4) where the hell does it say anything about dna testing? cameron mentions some statisticians (because their calculations on the odds of a mother, father, and son having certain names are so much more reliable than the findings of trained archaeologists ), but there's nothing anywhere about dna testing. and if there was, as has been said, it would have been a load of crap anyway.


you see? there's plenty of ways to state that cameron's claim is a crock without resorting to mindless rants which conform to every possible definition of the term "blind faith." despite some people's claims to the contrary, it's quite possible to become a christian (or in my case, a messianic jew - essentially the same thing but jewish) without shutting off your brain in the process.

Cyber Bishop wrote:It's all about faith.

You know what I can never figure out is why is everyone always trying to debunk just Christianity and no other religion. Will we ever see a documentary trying to debunk Mohammad? I seriously doubt it.

There are more Muslims on th planet than any other organized religion but no one ever question them and their belief system like this.

Cyber Bishop wrote:It's all about faith.

You know what I can never figure out is why is everyone always trying to debunk just Christianity and no other religion. Will we ever see a documentary trying to debunk Mohammad? I seriously doubt it.

There are more Muslims on th planet than any other organized religion but no one ever question them and their belief system like this.

High Command wrote:Actually some people do but they usually end up getting murdered like that Dutch film maker recently.

Likewise people rarely criticise Judaism for fear of being labeled as anti-semitic.

It's not that people can't see faults in those religions it's just that the negative consequences of saying anything bad about them are enough to put most people off.

Cyber Bishop wrote:

High Command wrote:Actually some people do but they usually end up getting murdered like that Dutch film maker recently.

Likewise people rarely criticise Judaism for fear of being labeled as anti-semitic.

It's not that people can't see faults in those religions it's just that the negative consequences of saying anything bad about them are enough to put most people off.

My point is it seems to be ok to pick on Christianity but no one else.
So if Christians revolted and did those kind of scare tactics then they would most likely be left alone.

High Command wrote:

Cyber Bishop wrote:It's all about faith.

You know what I can never figure out is why is everyone always trying to debunk just Christianity and no other religion. Will we ever see a documentary trying to debunk Mohammad? I seriously doubt it.

There are more Muslims on th planet than any other organized religion but no one ever question them and their belief system like this.

Actually some people do but they usually end up getting murdered like that Dutch film maker recently.

Likewise people rarely criticise Judaism for fear of being labeled as anti-semitic.

It's not that people can't see faults in those religions it's just that the negative consequences of saying anything bad about them are enough to put most people off.