Comments on Ben Witherington: THE JESUS TOMB? ‘TITANIC’ TALPIOT TOMB THEORY SUNK...

Alex - Unless you want to discount Biblical eviden...

2008-05-21T08:12:00.000-07:00

Alex - Unless you want to discount Biblical evidence the earliest reference to an empty tomb, albeit indirect, is Paul's 1st letter to the Corinthians in chapter 15. Paul was a Jew and writing between 50 and 60 AD.

More Pictures of TITANIC click here

2008-04-16T09:59:00.000-07:00

More Pictures of TITANIC click here

The Government took the body, and used it's skull,...

2008-04-11T23:42:00.000-07:00

The Government took the body, and used it's skull, like they did with all other powerful leaders and are calling upon that spirit to rise...They wear dark cloths, sometimes white and they plot and they chant...I think Joeseph gave the body to puchus pilot or was it King herod. Joeseph was a friend of one of these two..not to mention that Jesus was with Peter when a man was being Hung on the tree or cross...so there was an imposter..Search the truth guys..its out there, there is an imposter in churches today...being worshipped

Sean: why do we have to wait someday to know the ...

2008-03-02T16:55:00.000-08:00

Sean: why do we have to wait someday to know the truth. Based on archaeological evidence, historical studies and artifacts and ancient documents, we can know quite a lot about the past. Experts have examined the theories proposed by Jacobovici, James Cameron and Dr. James Tabor and have rejected it and the Jesus Family Tomb crowd have no really responded with any kind of scholarship . . . just mudslinging. Check out my booklet, "Burying the Jesus Family Tomb Controversy" by Louis Lapides. You can get on Amazon. Read the articles posted by Dr. Witherington and Darrell L. Bock. You can't just say "someday we'll know the truth." I think you can know it with confidence right now. It's the Discovery Channel documentary making the accusations based on connecting a lot of questionable dots to build a case. Where is the body of Jesus? Dig it up. Do the DNA studies and either uphold the claims of Christianity or disprove it. I hope you do the research; you'll be amazed what you'll find. I did.

Hmmm...this all is interesting but I look at it is...

2008-03-01T20:18:00.000-08:00

Hmmm...this all is interesting but I look at it is an unwillingness to expose/accept a highly probable truth which will shatter religion/faith of many people. One day all will know the truth....whatever it may be.

I am glad we're still keeping this essential issue...

2008-02-25T10:12:00.000-08:00

I am glad we're still keeping this essential issue alive. Dr. Witherington and Darrell Block and myself have responded to the claims of the "Jesus Tomb" theory. One thing to remember is that the bones of Jesus, if they were discoverable" would not be available to Jacobovici and his team since the Orthodox rabbis buried whatever bone fragment were unearthed in 1980. I seriously doubt whether the Orthodox Jewish bloc would allow the bones to be examined by forensics. On the other hand, the rabbis had any inkling the bones fragments were those of Jesus, they would make an exception in order to disprove the belief that Jesus is the Messiah of Israel. Take it from me as a Jewish believer, the rabbis would jump at the chance to dismantle the thorn of messianic Jews from their side.

Louis Lapides
http://thinkingoutsidetheblog.blogspot.com

I tried to talk to this Dr James Tabor once, and a...

2008-02-24T22:32:00.000-08:00

I tried to talk to this Dr James Tabor once, and all he wanted to know was how I got his email address.
IF any man should say they found the body of Jesus I would expect to hear this.

A the body is 2000 years old
B The body is flesh and bone remains
C the body has holes in his hands and feet.
D his head and back show signs of scaring from the crown of thorns and his beating
E He will be missing a rib that was surgically removed by those who prepared him for buriel.

My point of view is to look beyond the mathematics...

2008-02-20T00:15:00.000-08:00

My point of view is to look beyond the mathematics. If the disciples of Christ somehow stole the body away after crucifixion, it is best that they burn it. This is much better way to hide the truth than to bury the body in a tomb. Also, note that the disciples are fishermens, why would they risked their lives to spread the teaching of someone they know is a fake? Also, know that Saul is a member of Sanhendrin. He would loved to crucify Christians. But we see what happen to him in the book of Acts, and in the end landed him in prison. Why would a sane man holding an important position reversed his way 180 degree to become someone who defend Christ?

Mr. Lapides: What you have said is very interestin...

2008-01-23T12:44:00.000-08:00

Mr. Lapides: What you have said is very interesting. Eastern is aproaching and...the antichristian campaign will regain virulence. Héctor Amuedo (hectoramuedo@gmail.com)

Dr, Witherington: Thanks for your helpful comment...

2008-01-22T18:16:00.000-08:00

Dr, Witherington: Thanks for your helpful comments. Many evangelicals thought the Talpiot controversy faded away when the last vestiges of the Discovery Channel documentary, The Lost Tomb of Jesus flickered off the screen. Not so fast, buckaroos!

Last week Time magazine ran an article espousing that the Talpiot Tomb controversy is being "re-opened." So before we put away our arsenal of apologetic weapons, we need to realize that Easter is one it's way and the detractors of the veracity of the gospel and the resurrection of Christ are at it again. If you or your readers are interested, I have discussed this recent development on my blog, called "Thinking Outside the Blog" which you can access by clicking here. I also wrote a booklet entitled Burying the Jesus Family Tomb Controversy which can be ordered at Atlas books. Thanks and God bless you. Louis Lapides

CORRECTION: The correct title of the article is "T...

2007-11-29T12:55:00.000-08:00

CORRECTION: The correct title of the article is "THE CHRISTMAS-CRUSHING MOVIE"

I forgot to mention something: next December 7 the...

2007-11-28T10:37:00.000-08:00

I forgot to mention something: next December 7 they'r gonna introduce the movie (a movie for kids) "The Golden Compass", starring Nicole Kidmann. It's based on the 3 books (for kids also) of the series called "His Dark Materials" by the british writer Philip Pullman. The story (a fantasy story) is about two children whose mission is...to kill God!!! (Yes!). Finally God is killed by...a litle girl!! (Wow!!!). To know more about this film (an the books)please read the article "The Christmas-Crashing Movie" by L.Brent Bozell III. Simply introduce the title of the article in any Internet finder. Hector (from Montevideo, capital city of Uruguay, in South America)

The last book by David Yallop (The Power and the G...

2007-11-25T10:50:00.000-08:00

The last book by David Yallop (The Power and the Glory)trying to discredit Pope John Paul II is the last (up to now)link in the chain of events of the anti christian (and particularly anti catholic)campaign I have wrote about above (long ago). Just wait for next Eastern weeck an we'll see another new "discovery" or novel or movie against the Christian Church in general or the Catholic Church in particular.

Dear Ben,I find your work interesting and I have f...

2007-10-20T23:26:00.000-07:00

Dear Ben,

I find your work interesting and I have followed this debate for some time.

I haven't made up my mind yet, but either way, I won't find the result disturbing at all.

However, I was wondering why the discovery of the "Jesus tomb" was well known in academic circles only?

Why did it take so long before the general public was made aware of this find?

Regards,
Victoria

Thanks for the informative post!Free PS3

2007-09-16T04:29:00.000-07:00

Thanks for the informative post!

Free PS3

I totally agree with views expressed above. In fac...

2007-08-05T10:20:00.000-07:00

I totally agree with views expressed above. In fact I strongly believe with what is being said in this blog.

If anyone would like to comment or chat let me know.

Free Dating Advice by Tanya...
tanya@allaboutsingles.com

username: maryjanelove
System-Admin of the hottest singles site on the Internet
Mention this blog and I will give you one month free>>> have a happy day
http://www.allaboutsingles.com
Christian Singles chat
http://singlessites.blogspot.com/

hellorendez vous sur jewisheritage.fr a bientot

2007-07-09T09:40:00.000-07:00

hello
rendez vous sur jewisheritage.fr
a bientot

Hi, i just surfed in searching for interesting blo...

2007-06-24T20:59:00.000-07:00

Hi, i just surfed in searching for interesting blogs on Spirituality, you have a cool blog. Do keep up the good work. I'll be back even though i live far from where you live. its nice to be able to see what people from across the world thinks.

Warm Regards from the Other Side of the Moon.

On a related note perhaps you might find the following link interesting. Its propossing a theory and i'll like to hear your take on the subject via comments. See ya...

Was
Jesus an Essenes ?

Bibby

Kerala, India

soo cool

2007-06-23T12:08:00.000-07:00

soo cool

From the biblical documents, it appears to me that...

2007-05-26T12:49:00.000-07:00

From the biblical documents, it appears to me that there is textual evidence against a connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Talpiot Tomb. Read carefully, Acts 2 indicates that no one at that time knew of any claim that the dead body of Jesus Christ remained in a tomb anywhere. My position is expressed in the following three-part summation.

Phil Arnold, Ph.D.
The Reunion Institute
Houston, Texas

I. Historical method insists that the historical and religious
primary sources be searched for what evidence is present for belief in the existence of the Talpiot Tomb as the burial site for Jesus and his family. What do the texts, canonical or non-canonical, from the first century tell us about Talpiot and Jesus? None of these texts connects Jesus Christ to Talpiot. But, in my opinion, one passage by
Luke in Acts 2 weighs strongly against any connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Talpiot tomb. Before turning to this passage in Part III below, let's examine other New Testament evidence against Talpiot having to do with Jesus Christ.

It is reasonable to suppose that had the Talpiot tomb been that of
the Jesus Family, it would have been known to both friend and foe of the Jesus Movement. Family members waiting their turn to be interred in Talpiot would have been keenly aware of the existence of this "generational" tomb. This means that the Talpiot Tomb would
have been known by Joseph, Mary, Jesus, the brothers and sisters of
Jesus, including James of course; not to mention their wives and
children, cousins, and household members. Many outside the immediate family of Jesus would have had to have known of the Tomb simply because their children had married into the Jesus family; not to mention outsiders in the "tomb" trade, such as stone cutters
and "tomb gardeners."

With such a large number of persons over the course of two, three, or more generations knowing about the existence and use of the Talpiot Tomb for the Jesus Family, it seems likely that the disciples and close followers of Jesus would have heard about the Tomb also.
Hence, it is likely that word of the Tomb would have reached the ears of early converts to Christianity in Jerusalem. Thus, surely both the "Hebrew and Hellenist" Christians, such as Peter, Stephen and others would have heard of the existence and use of the Tomb--had there been such a tomb connected to Jesus.

Even if the family members failed to identify this Tomb and kept
it "on the quiet," those opposed to the Jesus Movement certainly
would have been aware of it and would have used it as a tool against the Movement, publicly pointing to it as the final abode of Jesus and his family members. Talpiot would have surely been placarded as the tomb of a dead Jesus despite the claims of disciples who said otherwise. One would imagine that the authorities would have posted "guards" to watch over the Jesus Dynasty Tomb as a possible
site for manifestations of Davidic "messianic fervor"--to make sure no stone was rolled away a second time! And this then would be very well known.

But, the historical texts, canonical and non-canonical, know nothing of this.

A person in the position of Paul would have surely heard of Talpiot
from both sides. First, as an enemy of the Jesus Movement, he would have heard most evidence that the Jerusalem anti-Christian leaders would have had against belief that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. As the recipient of this "ammunition," Saul/Paul would have used it to wreak havoc on both Jewish and Gentile converts to Christianity. It seems most probable that before he resorted to extreme physical punishment, he would have presented reasons to those he persecuted to reject the belief that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. Even if some of these early believers understood the resurrection to be "merely" a non-physical spiritual life of the
crucified one, surely Talpiot would have served as evidence that
Jesus was indeed stone cold dead. In this way, the enemies of the
earliest Christians could portray Jesus as remaining in the tomb at
Talpiot, suffering corruption, and not in any special way ascended
into heaven. The propaganda value of Talpiot would have gone a long
way as a weapon in the quiver of Paul against the Christian sect.
One wonders how Paul could have switched sides in the face of Talpiot?

II. Since many of the objections used against early Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus are "countered" in the gospels and letters of the New Testament, it would seem that there would exist in those pages some counter to the claims of Talpiot. Many claims are ountered, but why no argument against Talpiot? No where do we read
in our primary sources of any refutation of a claim that Jesus was buried in a family tomb at Talpiot.

The absence of such a refutation in the sources seems deafening. If
the Jesus stored at Talpiot was said by enemies of the resurrection to be Jesus of Nazareth, that charge would have had to have been refuted decisively. However, there is no historical evidence of any ecorded response to such an explosive charge. There are responses given to the charge that Jesus was born at Nazareth. That his birth was not legitimate. That he was not Davidic. That he broke Jewish laws. That he was inspired by Beelzebub. That his disciples "stole away" his body. All these responses prove that there were such charges in existence that had to be countered. It seems reasonable
to conclude that there was no charge or claim that Talpiot was a tomb containing the body/bones of Jesus Christ.

And when we read of certain stories that come close to the subject matter of tombs, death, and resurrection, it would seem that an opportunity to "refute" the Talpiot charges would be at hand. But, when Jesus confronts the tomb of Lazarus in John, the author makes no attempt to play off this tomb story to refute a "prevailing Talpiot tomb" charge. And, when Matthew writes that the enemies of the Jesus
Movement claim that his disciples came and took the body away, he
stops on the dime. He does not write that such enemies also say that Jesus was reburied down the road at Talpiot in the family tomb. Had that story been in circulation, as was the charge that the body was stolen, Matthew would have needed to have esponded to it also. It seems that it was not necessary for him to respond because no one was linking Talpiot to Jesus Christ.

Paul's statement in I Corinthians 15:17-20 that if Jesus is not
resurrected, Christian faith is in vain would surely mean that he had
confronted the Talpiot charge had such a claim been hurled at
Christians. How could Paul continue his new found faith in the resurrection of Jesus, if family members of Jesus, or Paul's former Jewish friends who were enemies of the Christians, had told him about Talpiot? Of all people, surely Paul would have heard of the Talpiot story--if it had been a story. So, we know, for a fact, that whatever Paul had heard about the Talpiot Tomb, if anything at all, it was not strong enough evidence to persuade him to drop his belief that Jesus was raised from the dead!

One would have every reason to expect that during his visit with
Peter and James in Jerusalem, after his escape from Damascus, Paul would have discussed Talpiot during his fourteen day visit
(Gal.1:18.) It is not plausible to believe that Paul talks with both
Peter and James, and neither one mentions Talpiot! Imagine, if you
can: James has "buried" both his father, Joseph, and his brother,
Jesus down the road in Talpiot; soon he knows he will inter his
mother, Mary, and other dear family members. Now, are we to think that James the Righteous looks Paul in the eye and says nothing, after first "winking" at Peter? Again, at the conference in Acts 15, James has to "conceal" Talpiot from Paul and others? Meanwhile, Mary and the brothers and the sisters continue the cover-up, as they all die one by one. Could James be so "double-minded?"

On the other hand, if everyone openly talks about Jesus' tomb
remaining at Talpiot, and that his body is suffering corruption
there, and that it has not been transformed and ascended in an unique way into heaven, how can Stephen, Peter, John, and others suffer persecution and death over how Jesus overcame death through
resurrection from the tomb? And what on earth would Paul think when he got wind of these open discussions?

None of these early sources provide any evidence for a connection between Talpiot and Jesus. From these primary sources, which we know for a fact speak of Jesus of Nazareth, there is no reference to or connection with Talpiot. This historian's judgment is that there are no reasons from these written texts to connect the two.

III. But there is written evidence against Talpiot being the tomb of
Jesus. It is found in Acts 2:29-34. Had anyone in the first century claimed that Talpiot was where the decaying bones of Jesus were kept, it would be very unlikely that Luke would have put the following words in the mouth of Peter while placing him next to the "Tomb of David," "I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day....He (David) spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God, he (Jesus) has received from the Father...for David did not ascend to heaven...."

If Talpiot was said to have been the very tomb of Jesus where his
body was decaying, why would Luke bring up the exact claim against
David? If enemies of the resurrection were pointing to the Talpiot Tomb as the location of the decaying body of Jesus, it is unlikely that a writer would introduce the subject of another tomb in Jerusalem where a decaying body that had not been resurrected and had not ascended into heaven was located!

Luke writes that we all know that this sepulcher is David's tomb. We
know that he is buried in this tomb. We know that his body is
decaying. We know that he has been abandoned to this grave. And we
all know that he is not ascended into heaven. We know these things
because this is David's tomb, and his decayed bones are inside.
If Talpiot had been associated with the burial of Jesus, the reader's response would be to imagine a voice from the crowd piping up, "Yes, but his family knows, and we know, that Jesus, too, is buried down at Talpiot, next to his father Joseph. "Everyone go down and see for yourself." Paul would have "fallen off his horse again" to get there.

My point is that it is most improbable that Luke writing in the first century would put such words in Peter's mouth when there is a devastating charge in circulation that Jesus is the one who is buried in a tomb nearby. It does not depend on whether Peter himself spoke these words at the time that Acts 2 is said to have taken place. If historically Peter did say similar words on Pentecost after Jesus was killed, then it is even more unlikely that there could have been a charge circulating that Jesus remained buried in a tomb in Jerusalem. Peter would have been taking a great gamble to bring up what would have been taken as a parallel to the Talpiot Tomb. The
crowd could have contradicted Peter on the spot. To go out of the way to have Peter say that which is being claimed against Jesus, would be a fatal flaw in the story line.

Whether it is the author Luke, or the apostle Peter, it makes no
difference for my point: to stand in front of what was thought to be
the Tomb of David and point to the decaying king in order to "show"
that Jesus is resurrected makes no sense when both the author and the
characters "know" that the exact same thing is being said of Jesus
down the road at Talpiot!

Such a rhetorical strategy would be as foolish as for a Mormon
apologist to write that we know David Koresh could not be a true
prophet, like Joseph Smith, because we know Koresh forged his Seven Seals from some golden plates he found which were planted by a writer named Solomon Spaulding. That would be the last thing a Mormon apologist would bring up to spike a rival prophet! Similarly with a Luke confronted with Talpiot. An author would avoid bringing up such a parallel. Let sleeping dogs lie.

Luke surely had never heard of any story connecting Talpiot to
Jesus. He freely uses the Peter story about David's tomb without
fear or hesitation.

An interrogation of these texts yields no evidence of a claim or
charge that the body of Jesus remained in a tomb in Talpiot or
anywhere. The internal evidence suggests that no such story
circulated, as it was bound to have done had there been such a tomb at Talpiot.

Phil Arnold, Ph.D.
The Reunion Institute
Houston, TX.
reunion@sbcglobal.net

Ossuary issue: The Ossuary marked “Mariamene E Mar...

2007-05-03T08:20:00.000-07:00

Ossuary issue:
The Ossuary marked “Mariamene E Mara” may/might have been misread?
In Aramaic “E Mara” translates to “The Master”
But what concerns me is the first part “ Mariamene”
Is it “Mariamene” or ( Maria - mene)
“mene” in Aramaic, translates to “ counted”, or “to be counted”, or was counted

So! Mariamene = Mary + counted
So, does the translation read?
1- “Mary is to be counted as a Master”?
2- “Mary is counted as a Master”?
3- “Mary was counted by the Master”?

Why would any Mary have "counted" after her first name?

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-05.

Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin

(m ´n , m ´n , t ´k l, y fär´s n) (KEY) , in the Bible, the mysterious riddle written by a hand on the wall at Belshazzar’s feast. These Aramaic words may be translated literally as, “It has been counted and counted, weighed and divided.” Daniel interpreted this to mean that the king’s deeds had been weighed and found deficient and that his kingdom would therefore be divided.

Marty

What I have said before is much better explained b...

2007-04-25T09:14:00.000-07:00

What I have said before is much better explained by NEHEMIA GORDON, a karaite jew, Israel citicen, in this site: www.hebrewyeshua.com/articles/
Dr. Witherington: The TITANIC is finally sinking!! (Let's propose the band on board to play some song!!) Hector Amuedo

I have received new information: The inscription "...

2007-04-24T11:31:00.000-07:00

I have received new information: The inscription "Mary" should'nt be read as such. It should be read as "MERAYA",a male name, the name of a MAN. So, it could'nt be the name of the mother of Jesus.
Hector Amuedo

It’s certainly true Dr. Witherington, that there i...

2007-04-23T11:56:00.000-07:00

It’s certainly true Dr. Witherington, that there is no historical evidence that supports Jesus had a son, or that tomb uncovered in the 1980’s did in fact belong to that of Jesus Christ.

What disturbs me is Christian literature taken as historical proof to repute the claims posed in the documentary. Many times we (I) are (have been) told by Christian leaders that events described should only be taken symbolically, and others should be seen as historical facts. Job can be stricken with ailments because of bet between god (not God) and the devil, Jonah is swallowed by a whale, –but, there is no possible way that a tomb can ever be found with the Christ because we are 100% positive that Jesus rose from the dead in front of 500 of his followers.

History always has a way of being terribly one-sided. Just as the documentary molds its conclusions to fit the theory in scope, biblical scholars have been guilty of the same for thousands of years. What better way to control people than through FEAR. And of course, who better to fear, than God? Not to mention, how many versions of the bible are they, and by how many people, over how many years was it written? Talk about statistical evidence…

BTW, not being a Christian or believer of the bible in a historical sense, doesn’t mean one cannot hold a strong faith in the lord. My God has no name or human face, but is unmistakably present everywhere, and in everything.

Thanks!

I put the inscribed ossuaries from Rahmani's Catal...

2007-04-19T18:56:00.000-07:00

I put the inscribed ossuaries from Rahmani's Catalogue into an Excel spreadsheet if anyone wants view and sort the names or see what was in other tombs (good through 1994). It makes for an interesting excercise. It is only a sub-set of known inscriptions from the period but seems to be a fair representation of the larger group.