Do you think Cameron and his partners will end up pulling the documentary?
Tomb of Jesus & James Cameron
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
Some archaeologist at the Rockefeller museum is saying the documentary makes a mockery of archaeology, that Jacobovici is just pimping the Bible, and that the whole thing should be thrown out.
The producer is in court right now over another documentary, which the Discovery Channel also showed, I think it was the Ossuary of James.
Jacobovici interviews a statistician from the U. of Toronto who says the odds are 600 to 1 in favor that those were the tombs of the Biblical Jesus, Joseph, and Mary, go figure, and they call it science.
The producer is in court right now over another documentary, which the Discovery Channel also showed, I think it was the Ossuary of James.
Jacobovici interviews a statistician from the U. of Toronto who says the odds are 600 to 1 in favor that those were the tombs of the Biblical Jesus, Joseph, and Mary, go figure, and they call it science.
Last edited:
Yeshua(?)son of jehosef(is that right?), even in the pdf there is a question mark.
wtf is that? the first time i saw that looked like they were reallllly trying hard to deduct that scribblly chicken scratch , yet one or two others are clearly defined. has to be seen to be believed.
no think about this, oj simpsons dna became "tainted" in two weeks and they only had buckets of it. this dna comes from dust- now when did all this take place? over two weeks ago right? most people say it would not make sense for them top be buried there yet there is a movie? no, a documentery.
i could go on but it's too boring. this is why is say more need to be looked into with that evolution theory.
wtf is that? the first time i saw that looked like they were reallllly trying hard to deduct that scribblly chicken scratch , yet one or two others are clearly defined. has to be seen to be believed.
no think about this, oj simpsons dna became "tainted" in two weeks and they only had buckets of it. this dna comes from dust- now when did all this take place? over two weeks ago right? most people say it would not make sense for them top be buried there yet there is a movie? no, a documentery.
i could go on but it's too boring. this is why is say more need to be looked into with that evolution theory.
Rockefeller you say? Well that just scored 5000 points for James Cameron & friends in my opinion. Talk about injecting serious lies in science and history should be the Rockefella' Motto.
James Cameron's Sarcophagi
You know what I'm talking about. I'm pretty sure all of teh Christians are going to say they aren't, the less-than-faithful are going to say they are. One argument from the "they aren't" camp is that the names of "Jesus", "Mary", "Joseph", and "Judah" were some of the more common names at the time, while the "they are" camp says the odds of finding them all together is incredibly rare. They point out "Mary Magdalene" as the clincher.
I don't know. I think Cameron's just trying to make a living and has what could be a hot topic on his hands. But my question is this: If Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Judah (let's leave Mary Magdalene out just for argument's sake) are such common names, how does anyone know the scriptures are written about the same people? If the names are so common, couldn't they be about any Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Judah? It seems to me that it would be like trying to link records going on Joe, Jane, Bob, and Tom and convincing people years after the alleged events that it's the same Joe, Jane, Bob, and Tom.
You know what I'm talking about. I'm pretty sure all of teh Christians are going to say they aren't, the less-than-faithful are going to say they are. One argument from the "they aren't" camp is that the names of "Jesus", "Mary", "Joseph", and "Judah" were some of the more common names at the time, while the "they are" camp says the odds of finding them all together is incredibly rare. They point out "Mary Magdalene" as the clincher.
I don't know. I think Cameron's just trying to make a living and has what could be a hot topic on his hands. But my question is this: If Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Judah (let's leave Mary Magdalene out just for argument's sake) are such common names, how does anyone know the scriptures are written about the same people? If the names are so common, couldn't they be about any Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Judah? It seems to me that it would be like trying to link records going on Joe, Jane, Bob, and Tom and convincing people years after the alleged events that it's the same Joe, Jane, Bob, and Tom.
If I am not mistaken... 'Jesus' in ye' olde' Greek language is 'Zeus'... and why the tombstone didn't say 'Zeus'? Got me.
Hey neit, I think the Rockefeller museum would just as soon see evidence which discredits the Gospels, but they couldn't bring themselves to do it on this one.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Do you have any citations to research in a peer reviewed journal that could substantiate this self deprecating claim?
I did. There were multiple threads of the same topic being generated.
Please stay on topic and if you still have any difficulties with it, send me a PM or create a thread in the SiteFeedback subforum.
Please stay on topic and if you still have any difficulties with it, send me a PM or create a thread in the SiteFeedback subforum.
Sorry Syzygys . I did a quick look through the threads and didn't see any titles that leapt out about the subject. (Of course, I was on meds, and you know how that goes...) Are all of the original posts still in this thread? I thought mine had just been moved.
RickyH
Aside from the bible, where is there historical mention of him? (Seriously. I'm not just being snotty.)
RickyH
Aside from the bible, where is there historical mention of him? (Seriously. I'm not just being snotty.)
OK, let's get back on topic.
I as an atheist find this new evidence refreshing, because this would be the first physical evidence for Jesus' existence. I personally don't care either way, but I could make a good argument that he never even existed....
So Christians, you should all rejoice!!!
I as an atheist find this new evidence refreshing, because this would be the first physical evidence for Jesus' existence. I personally don't care either way, but I could make a good argument that he never even existed....
So Christians, you should all rejoice!!!
Good point, Syzygys. If he DID actually exist, this would be the irrefutable proof (assuming they could absolutely verify any DNA) that would at least give some credence to things. But whether or not Jesus existed, who cares? Aren't at least most of his teachings good enough, whether or not they came from some wandering wise man or a fictitious character? It amazes me how many Christians worship the man while paying only lip service to his teachings.
Yeah, well Mel Gibson's movie was a BLOCKBUSTER... this is a documentary... not the same thing moron. DNA doesn't prove it was Christ, it proves the Person found in the Jesus Tomb "Jesus son of Joseph" had a child... with Mariamne e Mara (Mary Magdelene) I think the evidence that Jesus did exist is the Amount of documentation... all of the Gospels... it really isn't a question of his existence but of his divinity.
Thomas
As a warning to those that might be tempted to follow the post above with a response: please stay on topic. Unless it relates to the alleged tomb of the alleged Christ, move discussion of the historicity of Jesus to: Scientific Approach to the Jesus Question.
-letters of Pliny
"How do I deal with the legal proceedings involving Christians. They congregate and sing hymns to Christ as to a god. But unlike A god Christ was a person who had lived on Earth."
-writings of Josephus
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he wrought surprising feats. He was the Christ
-various Jewish rabbinical writings
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged" (hanged was a common synonym for being Crucified.)
-Lucian of Samosata
"The Christians…worship a man to this day - the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account"
I apologize skinwalker.
Anyways this is pretty much bullshit. Anyone can tell he's just doing it to get his name in the paper, a book deal on his desk, and a movie offer in his Fax tray. End of story.
just a question.....
isnt there a piece of "the true cross" floating around in some cathedral in france?
why not swab it for traces of ANY biological matter (other than wood, smartasses) and use that as a control?
whatever the result, its going to either punch a hole in a christian myth (one or the other), or prove cameron is at least on the right track.
however, seeing as the resurrection of jesus is central to catholic/christian faith, i doubt they would be allowed permission.
isnt there a piece of "the true cross" floating around in some cathedral in france?
why not swab it for traces of ANY biological matter (other than wood, smartasses
) and use that as a control?whatever the result, its going to either punch a hole in a christian myth (one or the other), or prove cameron is at least on the right track.
however, seeing as the resurrection of jesus is central to catholic/christian faith, i doubt they would be allowed permission.
Redefine91 I'm sorry, I should have been clearer. I was wondering about contemporary accounts, like court records, or anything that might have been written about him while he was still alive. I don't know if they've dated the sarcophagi accurately, but some written material, properly dated, if they correspond to the age of the sarcophagi, might be an arrow in the right direction one way or the other.
w1z4rd
Valued Senior Member
Cameron’s documentary on Christ canned
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=...113889362&npp=POP&sig2=piQCUM56twVyNVLoc1khmQ
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=...113889362&npp=POP&sig2=piQCUM56twVyNVLoc1khmQ