Posted on 01/01/2013 6:32:59 PM PST by Theoria
no controversy ping.
Who cares where their bodies were buried? They’re all dust now.
... somebody call Dan Brown - he could write a book about this ....
Not everybody named Jesus is going to be a messiah, but fur shur, back in 01, none of them were Puerto Ricans!
Will this all lead to a remote island and dinosaurs running amuck?
Jesus wasn’t buried anywhere, because He is still alive.
Too bad they cancelled the show, I enjoyed it. National Geographic should have kept it going with peer review or opposing ideas segmented in.
why??? the Jews never denied the existence of Christ, only his divinity...
interesting - secret source of Christianity.
And here all this time I thought it was the living Christ Jesus.
“... somebody call Dan Brown - he could write a book about this ....”
or John Brown, for that matter, he knows all about it because...
“John Brown’s body lies a-mouldering in the grave
Which very well be the reason there is not much to the story as being some secret source of Christianity. I doubt Jesus having had an additional source of Christianity that was kept secret would allow it to remain a secret for very long. If the secret source had any divine legitimacy, he would never have it remain secret, never allow his followers to remain deprived of it.
A gravesite for Miriam would rock a few boats. That would be Mary. Her presumed bodily assumption would be disproved and a key tenet of Mariology would have to be discarded. This, to me, would be a good thing, since the veneration of Mary has veered into excess and error. Others would fight it tooth and nail.
Are you talking about the Talpiot tombs?
Suffice it to say, if this was genuine, I don't think Christians would be too happy with the results.
Miriam (Mary) is a very common name. Even within the Gospels there were many Marys (Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Mary the wife of Celophas, etc)... The sensationalism of the title notwithstanding, the article is a big nothing. Besides the reference to Miriam, it tries to also imply that the graves contain the bones of "Yehoshua bar Yoseph” (I presume this is supposed to be Jesus - son of Joseph)... and “Yehuda bar Yeshua (Jesus)". As stated by many others - if the grave of Jesus, or his bones, were available, they would have been placarded to put down this 'outrageous' claim that Jesus is the Christ who died (according to Scriptures), and was buried, and rose again (according to Scriptures). When Peter boldly proclaimed the Risen Saviour on that Pentecost day in Jerusalem (Acts 2), there was no response from the authorities. No grave, no bones to show...
So someone found some graves making references to some very common names at that time - OK. Extrapolating further is a waste of time and energy.
The answer of course is No. Otherwise, the Hollywood jews would have made a box-office smash hit about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
