Cameron the Infidel

Redstate.com ^ | 27 February, 2007 | .cnI redruM

[.cnI redruM]

Cameron is a pathetic man. He deserves the utmost ridicule for this. He'll make $100M off this instead. Barf-inducing.

[poobear]

And St. Peter will say to Cameron at the pearly gates:

"SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!"

[dangus]

He'll make $100M off a widely-derided Discovery-channel pseudo-documentary? I don't think so.

[piytar]

Cameron will reap his rewards for this -- both in this world ($$$$$ and the praise of anti-Christian scumbags who dominate the left and Hollywood) and the next...

[RexBeach]

When is Mr. Cameron going to go after Mohammed?

[silverleaf]

Perhaps the press should be reminded that Cameron's claims also constitute apostasy against the muslim prophet Isa and his mother Mary

[Physicist]

Cameron is a pathetic man.

Pathetic, why? Do you think he forged the ossuaries? Or do you think they're for real, but that he's wrong to bring them to the public?

[Long Island Pete]

Hollyweird doesnt have the spine to do that. Bashing Christians is acceptable to them.

[Tax-chick]

There are quite a few composition errors in this piece, including several out-of-place apostrophes. And the jockstrap image is unoriginal and overused.

[BenLurkin]

Not to worry, I'm sure Cameron's next project will be all about the REAL Mohamed.

[kittymyrib]

Cameron should ask Van Gogh of the Netherlands what happens when one insults a religion...oh, that's right...Van Gogh insulted Muslims and got his throat slit and an explanation pinned to his chest with the bloody knife.
Wonder what infidel will be publishing a book or making a movie attacking Jesus next year during Lent? It's as predictable as springtime that the msm, including Fox, will give them free wall-to-wall publicity, and Christians roll over and take it, so why not?

[.cnI redruM]

No, but I think the archaeologist who dug them up already described them as completely mundane. He also explained that there were at least 70 other tombs in Jerusalem that bore the name Jesus. It was a fairly common first name in the era.

Cameron already had all of this knowledge available to him before he made his documentary. He went ahead with it anyway.

[.cnI redruM]

Don't wait up for Godot.

[Sans-Culotte]

Pathetic, why? Do you think he forged the ossuaries? Or do you think they're for real, but that he's wrong to bring them to the public?

Probably all of the above. There is as likely a chance that someone forged the names centuries ago as not. Even if they are real, they prove nothing. He almost certainly is engaging in Christian-bashing as the blogger suggests. I find it interesting that people who buy into this believe certain parts of the Bible if it supports part of their story (such as the existence of Mary Magdalene, the fact that Jesus's mother was named Mary and that Jesus was reputedly the son of Joseph the carpenter, etc). "The rest of the story" is conveniently jetiisoned. It seems to me that if this story was approached from a point of view that denies the gospel accounts of Christ's life, that one should assume nothing about Jesus, including who his family members were or who might have been His paramour. If you do this, then you are left with a tomb with some bones of a guy named Jesus and some other people.

However, if non-believers find comfort in this discovery, it is of no concern to me.

[Joe 6-pack]

"When is Mr. Cameron going to go after Mohammed?"

Cameron doesn't even have the onions to go after Scientology.

[Physicist]

No, but I think the archaeologist who dug them up already described them as completely mundane. He also explained that there were at least 70 other tombs in Jerusalem that bore the name Jesus. It was a fairly common first name in the era.

If that were all there was to it, it wouldn't be worth calling attention to it. My belief is that this is a different family, but the combination of names does seem unlikely enough to justify the attention.

Very few people doubt that Jesus was a historical person, and nobody can discount his importance, so if these are relics of the man and his family, they deserve close scrutiny. Look at the attention the Shroud of Turin has received over the centuries.

While we're on the subject, does the "Jesus" ossuary actually contain any bones? If there's one historical fact about Jesus that almost everyone can agree upon, it's that he was crucified by the Romans. The bones ought to show evidence of that, if they're for the right man.

And if the box is empty...

[AnAmericanMother]

Miriam/Mariam/Mary, Iusuf/Joseph, and Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus were about the most common names around at that time. We don't have very many given names in English (as long as you eliminate the trendy silly names and the Southern custom of giving people last names as a given name), and they had even fewer.

It's like thinking that a set of modern gravestones with John, Mary, and James on them are related to any particular individual within the same century named John, Mary, or James. Or assuming two people named Smith are related. Highly unlikely.

[betsyross1776]

We let these morons off too easy. We pray for them they laugh at us. Got a better idea , don't go to or allow any of your family to go to any movie or see anything he makes in the future. Sooner or later he can blame us for bankrupting him. The poor man cannot live without his big bucks and his fame. Send the fame down the drain, just don't let him get away with this. let every Christian put this guy in retirement in a county run home.

[Sensei Ern]

but whose DNA is being compared with whose? Did they swab the Holy Ghost?

He could take a DNA sample from the eucharist. :-P

Actually, he has nothing but supposition that is leakier than the Titanic.