Tomb of Jesus and his son found

Post by **_Gazelam** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:30 am

This article can be found here:http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/26/cameron_grave/

Hollywood giant James Cameron has set himself his biggest challenge yet – rewriting the Bible after discovering that Jesus sired a son before being buried outside Jerusalem.

Cameron claims to have found the, now empty, tomb of one Jesua, son of Joseph. The sepulchre also apparently contained the bodies of Mary. As well as another Mary, Matthew and Jofa, and most spectacularly, Jonah, son of Jesua

Cameron will claim in a documentary on the Discovery Channel next month that Jesua is also known as Jesus – yes that one – and that this particular first century household is better know to Christians as “The Holy Family”.

This will be spectacular news as readers of the New Testament have tended to think that after rising from the dead, Jesus ascended to heaven where he is seated at the right hand of the father. The father in question being not Joseph, but God himself.

Equally shocking, at least to anyone who doesn’t buy their reading matter in airports, will be the news that Jesus fathered a son, when he was supposed to have spent his short life performing miracles, redeeming sinful mankind and generally fulfilling his divine mission.

But don’t worry, Cameron has the whole story well tied down.

Apparently the tomb was found 20 years ago, and it has taken this long to decipher the names and to confirm the identities using DNA analysis.

This timelag is just a blink of the eye in biblical terms, and is totally understandable given that Jesus was the son of God, and pinning down supreme beings to get a cheek swab is never easy.®

Sounds pretty good eh? Wonder if he'll get Celene Dion to do a song for the documentery.

_Yoda · Post by **_Yoda** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:31 pm

What I see as a hole in the entire theory right off the bat is that Jesus was buried in a borrowed tomb. How could his name be anywhere near or associated with it?

Also, it has been documented that Mary Magdeline traveled to France following Jesus' death, so how are her remains now, all of the sudden, found in the tomb with Jesus' remains?

It makes no sense.

Now, as far as the part about Jesus being married to Mary Magdeline and having children with her, I think that is very plausible...but that's for another thread. ;)

Post by **_Notoriuswun** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:42 pm

If they linked the DNA from the supposed shroud of turin to the supposed Jesus burial plot, then it would be an open and shut case...and maybe people would finally stop believing in magical zombies.

Also it is worth pointing out that alot of people have dismissed Cameron's findings...and no one has actually watched the documentary yet. Lets not point the finger of blame just yet...a bunch of doubting Thomases if you ask me ;)

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:27 pm

Don't even know where to begin, Gaz. Surely there was more than one Yeshua, Jesua, Joshua in those days, more than one Joseph, etc. The Jesus of the Bible was buried in the tomb of (don't quote me) Joseph (?) of Aramathea (?).

DNA samples on the remains of Jesus? Does anyone see anything wrong with this idea?

Jersey Girl

Post by **_moksha** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:33 pm

It will be very interesting to watch this program and find out more about these ossuaries found in East Talpiot (Armon Hanatziv) in 1980 -- that included the names Yeshua bar Yohosef, Yehosef, two Miriams, Yehuda bar Yeshua, and Mattai.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:36 pm

Uhhhhhooookay,

Let's get serious here. First of all, how on earth would DNA samples prove it was the Jesus of the Bible? (Impossible) If there were some way to prove it was the Jesus of the Bible (which there is no way) the proof automatically disproves the Bible. Hello? Anybody home?

Jersey Girl

Post by **_Notoriuswun** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:13 am

Jersey Girl wrote: (Impossible) If there were some way to prove it was the Jesus of the Bible (which there is no way) the proof automatically disproves the Bible. Hello? Anybody home?

Jersey Girl

that's kind of the point.

Post by **_Notoriuswun** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:14 am

Jersey Girl wrote:
DNA samples on the remains of Jesus? Does anyone see anything wrong with this idea?

It invokes a slippery slope...but I would be willing to bet that 98% of Evangelical christians would be more supportive of cell cell research and cloning.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:30 am

Notoriuswun wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote: (Impossible) If there were some way to prove it was the Jesus of the Bible (which there is no way) the proof automatically disproves the Bible. Hello? Anybody home?

Jersey Girl

that's kind of the point.

What part of my comments are you referring to, Nortoriuswun? Which is kind of the point?

Jersey Girl

Post by **_Notoriuswun** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:39 am

Jersey Girl wrote:
Notoriuswun wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote: (Impossible) If there were some way to prove it was the Jesus of the Bible (which there is no way) the proof automatically disproves the Bible. Hello? Anybody home?

Jersey Girl

that's kind of the point.

What part of my comments are you referring to, Nortoriuswun? Which is kind of the point?

Jersey Girl

The point is that the much-interpreted Biblical Jesus would be refuted (if the claims are true). It would also indicate that he had a mortal death, and that he was just a prophet (a belief exhibited by many early Christians...up until Constantine and his revelation on the battlefield)

I don't think there is a person alive who questions whether JC lived, rather THE question is one of divinity...or lack thereof.