Jesus’ burial site found

[MrsMcD]

The cave in which Jesus Christ was buried has been found in Jerusalem, claim the makers of a new documentary film.

If it proves true, the discovery, which will be revealed at a press conference in New York Monday, could shake up the Christian world as one of the most significant archeological finds in history.

The coffins which, according to the filmmakers held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth, his mother Mary and Mary Magdalene will be displayed for the first timeon Monday in New York.

Jointly produced by Emmy award-winning documentary filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici and Oscar winning director James Cameron, the film tells the exciting and tortuous story of the archeological discovery.

The story starts in 1980 in Jerusalem’s Talpiyot neighborhood, with the discovery of a 2,000 year old cave containing ten coffins. Six of the ten coffins were carved with inscriptions reading the names: Jesua son of Joseph, Mary, Mary, Matthew, Jofa (Joseph, identified as Jesus’ brother), Judah son of Jesua (Jesus’ son - the filmmakers claim).

Decades of research

The findings in the cave, including the decipherment of the inscriptions, were first revealed about ten years ago by internationally renowned Israeli archeologist Professor Amos Kloner.

Since their discovery, the caskets were kept in the Israeli Antiquities Authority archive in Beit Shemesh, but now two have been sent to New York for their first public exhibition.

Although the cave was discovered nearly 30 years ago and the casket inscriptions decoded ten years ago, the filmmakers are the first to establish that the cave was in fact the burial site of Jesus and his family.

The film, which documents the stages of the discovery, is the result of three years labor and research. It will be broadcast on the international Discovery Channel, Britain's Channel 4, Canada’s Vision and Israel’s Channel 8, which also took part in the film's production.

According to the filmmakers, the film’s claim is based on close work with world-famous scientists, archeologists, statisticians, DNA specialists and antiquities experts.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...368731,00.html

[MrsMcD]

TODAY host Meredith Vieira, who read the book and watched the documentary, said the implications are astounding given that billions of people have been taught that Jesus was resurrected both in spirit and body, ascended to heaven, never married and had no offspring. The film and book, if accepted, could shake the church that Jesus founded to its core.

Not!

Jesus rose from the dead: there are no bones to be found because His tomb is empty.

[Digging4Truth]

Although the cave was discovered nearly 30 years ago and the casket inscriptions decoded ten years ago, the filmmakers are the first to establish that the cave was in fact the burial site of Jesus and his family.

Thirty years of arheological experts study this. Archeological experts who would probably love to prove Jesus was a myth. But the filmmakers, who stand to make millions, are the ones who established that the cave was the burial site of Jesus & his family?

Well... what a coincidence.

[Margies3]

the report that I heard said two things I thought interesting:

1) the name Jesus was as common in those days as John Smith would be today. So just because the box says Jesus doesn't mean it's OUR Jesus. (we know it's not!)

2) the tomb is from the South of Nazareth. The tomb that OUR Jesus was buried in was NORTH of Nazareth.

But I'd say the devil must be running scared at this point for him to stir up this kind of trouble. Must be the day of His appearing is nearer than ever

[Digging4Truth]

Several things....

Jesus' name was basically the same as Joshua's name.

At first glance and without any further information these names appear to have come from the greek rendition of the names since they so closely resemble Jesus rather than Joshua. Greek is the language that we have the NT in but the angel did not speak greek when he told Mary... thou shalt call his name Yeshua.

They said that these were common names.

The inscriptions only give names except for one coffin which told that Judah was the son of Jesua and Jesua was the son of Joseph so we have no idea what relation the others were to each other. We have no idea who Mary was and what relation she was to Jesua. We have no evidence that mary #2 was Mary Magdalene.

It is also said that these were common names.

So.... since they were common names....

What are the chances that in the general time frame there was ANOTHER joseph with a son named Jesua (which, again, I am not convinced is the same as Yeshua which is very similar if not the same as Joshua.

The only exact duplicate with the Biblical Jesus we have is that this Jesua's fathers name was also Joseph.

If someone is going to try and "sink Christianity" (as is being said concerning this documentary since the same guy that is doing this also did Titanic) then PLEASE... COME ON... at least TRY... at least give it a good ole Harvard try.

This is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Margies3

the report that I heard said two things I thought interesting:

1) the name Jesus was as common in those days as John Smith would be today. So just because the box says Jesus doesn't mean it's OUR Jesus. (we know it's not!)

2) the tomb is from the South of Nazareth. The tomb that OUR Jesus was buried in was NORTH of Nazareth.

But I'd say the devil must be running scared at this point for him to stir up this kind of trouble. Must be the day of His appearing is nearer than ever

Where does the Bible say Jesus was buried anywhere near Nazareth? I thought he was buried in the tomb belonging to Joseph of Arimathea, the tomb being located near Jerusalem?

As for the name, I suspect that the name would have been in Aramaic and, thus, it would have been something along the lines of Yeshua or Yehoshua.

[Margies3]

Originally Posted by Chan

Where does the Bible say Jesus was buried anywhere near Nazareth? I thought he was buried in the tomb belonging to Joseph of Arimathea, the tomb being located near Jerusalem?

As for the name, I suspect that the name would have been in Aramaic and, thus, it would have been something along the lines of Yeshua or Yehoshua.

you know, Chan, I believe you are right on this one. I was just quoting the news people without really thinking about what they were saying (they were the ones who said that Jesus had been buried north of Nazareth. Just out of curiosity (and being too lazy to look it up), is Jerusalem north of Nazareth by any chance????

Originally Posted by Margies3

you know, Chan, I believe you are right on this one. I was just quoting the news people without really thinking about what they were saying (they were the ones who said that Jesus had been buried north of Nazareth. Just out of curiosity (and being too lazy to look it up), is Jerusalem north of Nazareth by any chance????

I know you were just quoting them. Jerusalem is significantly far south of Nazareth.

[joyful]

Originally Posted by MrsMcD

Although the cave was discovered nearly 30 years ago and the casket inscriptions decoded ten years ago, the filmmakers are the first to establish that the cave was in fact the burial site of Jesus and his family.

The above phrase is the one that really gets to me in this article. It is so biased (of course, what else should I expect...lol). The word "establish" in this sentence is ridiculous. It should have read "the first to claim" or something similar, since they have "established" nothing!