DOCSLIB.ORG

Lost Tomb of Jesus”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lost Tomb of Jesus” CHRISTIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE PO Box 8500, Charlotte, NC 28271 Article: JAL140 COLLAPSING THE HOUSE OF CARDS OVER THE “LOST TOMB OF JESUS” This article first appeared in the Effective Evangelism column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 30, number 3 (2007). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org The Discovery Channel recently aired “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” a documentary about ten ossuaries that archaeologists discovered at Talpiot in south Jerusalem, that, the documentary claims, originally contained the bones of Jesus, his mother, his “wife,” his “son,” and other relatives. The ossuaries were empty, since, shortly after their original discovery, the remains were reburied at a designated place in Greater Jerusalem. The documentary, although skillfully filmed and interesting to view, reaches sensational conclusions that continue what seems to be a long-running media attack on the historical Jesus, which in popular parlance might be termed “More Junk on Jesus.” One might have thought that this had culminated in that book of falsehoods, The Da Vinci Code, but, no, the misinformation on Jesus continues, usually just in time for the church’s seasons of Advent (before Christmas) or Lent (before Easter). The television audience has reacted to the program in various ways: Unqualified Acceptance: “Scholars were involved, DNA evidence was used, statisticians gave the odds at 600-to-1 that this had to be Jesus’ family tomb, so it must be a slam-dunk: Jesus’ remains have been discovered, so I no longer believe.” Or, “I never did in the first place.” This is the response of the credulous and naïve, who accept anything in print or on film as factual truth. Conditional Response, No Concern:“If those really are Jesus’ bones, would it affect my faith? Not my faith!” said Jesus Seminar co-founder John Dominic Crossan, to which most Christians might respond (were it not so judgmental): “Of course not. He has no faith.” Tepid Response: “I don’t know. I’ll wait for further evidence. I really don’t know what the fuss is all about.” When there is an attempt to rip out the very heart of the Christian faith, such an attitude makes little sense, particularly for the Christian. Conditional Response, Much Concern:“If those really are Jesus’ bones, it could destroy my faith.” This reaction is certainly grounded in logic, but the premise is without merit, as we shall see. Hostile rejection: “This is blasphemy! The Bible says that Jesus rose from the dead, so how could He have left His bones behind?” This response may be fine for fellow Christians, but it leaves the rest of the world unimpressed. None of the above, I think, is an optimal way for Christians to react to this latest furor (although I must confess to a good deal of sympathy for the last!). Instead, I propose a response based on reason and fostered by faith. Reason. The obvious first step should be to examine—with cool dispassion—the evidence supplied by the producers of this docudrama. This is difficult, however, due to the extremely fragile nature of that evidence. (There is a much stronger case for discovering Jesus’ bones and for how that would affect the world in the scenario I conjure up in my novel A Skeleton in God’s Closet than there is in the gossamer chain of “proofs” uncovered at Talpiot. Don’t worry, though: the novel has a happy ending.) Nearly every interested archaeologist or historian in the world has found the conclusions of the Discovery Channel’s documentary absolutely unfounded. Here are the most important reasons they put forth: CRI Web: www.equip.org Tel: 704.887.8200 Fax:704.887.8299 (1) Nothing is new here: scholars have known about the ossuaries—and been unimpressed by them—ever since March of 1980, so this is old news recycled. The general public learned about the ossuaries in 1996, when the BBC filmed a documentary on them and the “findings” tanked again, although more recently, James Tabor’s book, The Jesus Dynasty, tried to revive interest. Filmmakers James Cameron (The Titanic, Terminator films) and Simcha Jacobovici (various documentaries relating to Judaism) have climbed aboard the sensationalist bandwagon as well, the latter coauthoring a newly published book, The Jesus Family Tomb, which is equally as groundless as The Jesus Dynasty. (2) All of the names inscribed on the ossuaries—Yeshua (Joshua, Jesus) son of Joseph, Jose (Joseph), Maria (Mary), Mariamene e Mara, Matia, and Judah son of Jesus—are extremely common names for Jews of that time and place, and thus nearly all scholars consider that these names are merely coincidental, as they did from the start. Some even dispute that “Yeshua” is one of the names, suggesting “Hanan” instead. One out of four Jewish women at that time, for example, was named Mary. There were 21 Yeshuas (Jesuses) who were important enough for the first-century Jewish historian Josephus to record, with many thousands of others that never made history. (3) The “wondrous” mathematical odds that these names must refer to Jesus and his family are simply numbers games hyped by Jacobovici. One must believe, to reach his conclusions, that every link in a long chain of hypotheses he presents is true, when in fact every link is weak enough to break the chain. (4) There is no reason whatever to equate “Mariamene e Mara” with Mary Magdalene, as Jacobovici claims. Using a late, apocryphal, fifth-century romance like the Acts of Philip to try to demonstrate this link shows how far he has to reach. In fact, a better translation of “Mariamene e Mara” is “Mariamne (as it is usually spelled today) also called Mara.” Better yet, the latest evidence reports that there were two skeletal remains inside that ossuary, so the inscription is best translated, “Mariamne and Mara” or “Martha.” (5) It also does not matter if Mariamene’s DNA is different from that of “Yeshua.” That particular “Mariamne” could have been the wife of that particular “Yeshua,” who was certainly not Jesus, or she could have been the wife or sister or daughter of any other male in that group! Although a magnet for attention, this use of DNA proved nothing whatever. (6) There is also good reason not to equate “Maria” with Mary the mother of Jesus. Church tradition and the earliest Christian historian, Eusebius of Caesarea, are unanimous in reporting that Mary, the mother of Jesus, died in Ephesus, where the apostle John, faithful to Jesus’ commission from the cross, had accompanied her. (7) Why in the world would the “Jesus Family” have a burial site in Jerusalem, of all places, the very city that crucified Jesus? Galilee was their home. They might have had such a family burial site in Galilee, but not Judea. (8) The “Jesus Family” simply could not have afforded the large, ornate crypt uncovered at Talpiot. This is the burial site of a prominent, upper middle-class or wealthy family from Jerusalem, not a carpenter’s clan from Galilee. (9) Nor, had the disciples stolen Jesus’ body for reburial there, would they have put his name on the ossuary. Their motive, obviously, would have been to hide the identity of Jesus’ body in view of its “claimed” resurrection. (10)If this were Jesus’ family burial site, what is Matthew doing there—if indeed “Matia” is thus to be translated? (11)Why is there no tradition whatever—Christian, Jewish, or secular—that any of the Holy Family were buried at a family plot in Jerusalem? CRI Web: www.equip.org Tel: 704.887.8200 Fax:704.887.8299 2 (12)Please note the extreme bias of the Canadian director and leading figure in this documentary, Simcha Jacobovici, who seems often to sensationalize in his films. You may have caught his television special, The Exodus Decoded, in which he “explained” just about everything that still needed proving or explaining in the Exodus account in the Old Testament! It finally bordered on the ludicrous, and now he’s doing it again, though in reverse: this time attacking the scriptural record. As for James Cameron, how do you follow the success of The Titanic? Well, with an even more “titanic” story. The television footage of Jacobovici and Cameron making their drastic statements in a press conference on February 26, 2007, prior to the airing of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” was disgusting, as was their subsequent claim that they “respected” Jesus. The dramatic recreations in the documentary, which favored their own hypotheses, the statements of experts taken out of context, the misquotations of some of those experts, and the selective editing are all a disservice to the truth. (Ted Koppel’s sober discussion following the docudrama was the finest part of the program, and a touch of objectivity on the part of the Discovery Channel.) (13)Even Israeli archaeologists and authorities, who—were they anti-Christian—might have used this “discovery” to discredit Christianity, did not do so. In fact, they did quite the opposite. Joe Zias, for example, for years the director of the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem, holds Jacobovici’s claims up for scorn and his documentary as “nonsense.” Those involved in the project, he added, “have no credibility whatever.” Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, called the conclusions in question “completely impossible…nonsense.” He added, in a Jerusalem Post interview, “Three or four ossuaries have been discovered with the names, ‘Jesus, son of Joseph.’” David Mevorah, curator of the Israel Museum, calls the results “far-fetched.” William Dever, one of America’s prominent archaeologists, said, “This would be amusing if it didn’t mislead so many people.” (14)Finally, and most importantly, there is no external literary or historical evidence whatsoever that Jesus’ family was interred together in a common burial place anywhere, let alone Jerusalem.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archaeology, Bible, Politics, and the Media Proceedings of the Duke University Conference, April 23–24, 2009
    Offprint from: Archaeology, Bible, Politics, and the Media Proceedings of the Duke University Conference, April 23–24, 2009 Edited by Eric M. Meyers and Carol Meyers Winona Lake, Indiana Eisenbrauns 2012 © 2012 by Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. www.eisenbrauns.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Archaeology, bible, politics, and the media : proceedings of the Duke University conference, April 23–24, 2009 / edited by Eric M. Meyers and Carol Meyers. pages ; cm. — (Duke Judaic studies series ; volume 4) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-57506-237-2 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Archaeology in mass media—Congresses. 2. Archaeology—Political aspects—Congresses. 3. Archaeology and history—Mediterranean Region—Congresses. 4. Archaeology and state—Congresses. 5. Cultural property—Protection—Congresses. I. Meyers, Eric M., editor. II. Meyers, Carol L., editor. CC135.A7322 2012 930.1—dc23 2012036477 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the Amer- ican National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. ♾ ™ Contents List of Contributors . viii Introduction . 1 Eric M. Meyers and Carol Meyers Part 1 Cultural Heritage The Media and Archaeological Preservation in Iraq: A Tale of Politics, Media, and the Law . 15 Patty Gerstenblith Part 2 Archaeology and the Media Fabulous Finds or Fantastic Forgeries? The Distortion of Archaeology by the Media and Pseudoarchaeologists and What We Can Do About It . 39 Eric H. Cline Dealing with the Media: Response to Eric H. Cline . 51 Joe Zias The Talpiyot Tomb and the Bloggers .
    [Show full text]
  • 4Th Sunday in Lent March 2, 2008 INTRODUCTION Sight Is A
    4th Sunday in Lent March 2, 2008 INTRODUCTION Sight is a wonderful gift, but what we see with our mind and heart is even of greater value. God helps us to see clearly. We have examples of that inner vision in all of today’s readings. Our first reading takes us back 1000 years before Christ when the prophet Samuel had to choose a king from among the sons of Jesse of Bethlehem. They all had the dignity and physical characteristics of potentially good leaders, but God knew who would make the best king. Paul tells us we have been enlightened by Christ and in the gospel we hear how a man born blind not only had his eyes opened by Christ but his heart, whereas those who claimed to be able to see were blinded by arrogance. HOMILY Two weeks ago, I appealed to all of our parishioners for their support of the Catholic Ministries Appeal. It is going well. We are about $2500 short of our $15,000 goal. I am most grateful to all who have responded. There has been one item that a few people have been confused about. In past years, at this time of the year, we have had the Archdiocesan Fund Drive. Some are wondering if another appeal is coming next. The answer is: No! I wanted to make another appeal to you today, not for money, but for your involvement at Mass. You might have noticed that last week and this week we’ve been singing some hymns you might not have heard for years, such as All the Earth Proclaim the Lord; Yes, I Shall Arise; My Soul is Longing for Your Peace.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TOMB of JESUS Easter 2007 4/5/07 We Are Here This Morning
    THE TOMB OF JESUS Easter 2007 4/5/07 We are here this morning to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ and to worship our risen Lord. Christianity is at its very heart a resurrection religion. If you remove the resurrection, Christianity is destroyed. Christ deliberately staked his credibility upon his resurrection. Twenty times in the gospel accounts we find Jesus announcing that He would rise from the dead We find the disciples proclaiming Jesus’ resurrection 145 times in the book of Acts alone. Historian Philip Schaff writes “The resurrection of Christ is therefore emphatically a test question upon which depends the truth or falsehood of the Christian religion.” On Sunday, March 4th the Discovery Channel aired a so-called documentary called, The Lost Tomb of Jesus. Movie director James Cameron (Titanic) claims that he has found the lost tomb of Jesus in Jerusalem. Along with Jesus’ tomb he claims to have found graves in the same general area of Jesus’ mother, father, supposed wife, (Mary Magdalene), and a son, Judah. A headline in the New York Time’s blog read “Raising the Titanic, Sinking Christianity?” Time followed, proclaiming that “this time the ship sinking is Christianity.” If indeed they have found the remains of Jesus, then Christianity has been debunked once and for all. But the question remains, “Is the tomb Cameron found really the tomb of Jesus? The site of Jesus’ supposed tomb was first found and excavated 27 years ago. Prominent Israeli archeologist Amos Kloner conducted extensive work and research on this tomb and its ossuaries ten years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus Was Not Buried in Talpiot
    Jesus was not buried in Talpiot Louis C. de Figueiredo Earlier this year Discovery Channel aired the programme “The Lost Tomb Of Jesus” directed by James Cameron and largely based on some investigation made by the Israeli-born, Canadian-based film maker Simcha Jacobovici. In conjunction with the film came the companion book The Jesus Family Tomb. The Discovery, the Investigation and the Evidence That Could Change History by Jacobovici and the paleobiologist Charles Pellegrino. It was claimed that a tomb discovered during some construction work in the East Talpiot region of Jerusalem in 1980 contained the ossuaries of Jesus and his family because they had inscriptions saying: Yeshua bar Josef/ Jesus, son of Joseph Maria Matia/ Matthew Yose/ Joseph Yehuda bar Yeshua/ Judah, son of Jesus Mariamene e Mara Some of the ossuaries were found broken. Of those found intact five had inscriptions in Hebrew or Aramaic, one in Greek, and the last one was plain. In his report A Tomb with Inscribed Ossuaries in East Talpiyot, Jerusalem Prof. Amos Kloner, then Jerusalem’s District Archaeologist, explained that the Greek inscription ‘Mariamene e Mara’ referred to a Mariamene, a variant of the name Mariam, Maryam and Marya, while ‘Mara’ was a contraction of Martha, this name also being “common in the Jewish feminine onomasticon.” ‘Mariamene’ was central to the programme because it was interpreted as referring to Mary Magdalene. “That’s the ringo, that’s what sets the whole film in motion”, the producer said. The claim that the Talpiot tomb was the “Jesus family Tomb”, and particularly that “Mariamene e Mara” meant “Mary Magdalene, the Master” provoked bitter contestation and indignant criticism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Tomb of Jesus 1 Anarchist Archaeology
    April 15, 2007 The Lost Tomb Of Jesus 1 Anarchist Archaeology The program opens with an excavation at a construction site in Jerusalem would fit since Magdala was described as a Greek speaking area. First of all for a new apartment complex. Children playing in the area discover what there is the continual reference to the “Jesus” family and the Jesus family appears to be a tomb and archaeologists are called in. The tomb, similar tomb. The site of the tomb is a problem first of all. Family tombs, if that is to many others, is assumed to be from around the first century A.D. be- what we are dealing with would have been situated near the individuals home, fore the destruction of Jerusalem. Inside the burial site are limestone ossu- not some place they visited. Christ grew up in Nazareth. His earthly father, aries, stone coffins, containing the remains of what are assumed to be Joseph, was from Bethlehem, which might be considered close enough to be a family members in each of the tombs. On the side of each ossuary is an suburb of Jerusalem, but the excavation site is not outside Jerusalem, it ap- inscription with the name of the person and this is where the program be- pears to be in the heart of the city and is not far from the mosque of the rock gins to hint that there has been a cover-up of a great find. The name on which marks the site of the temple in the first century. If Christ had been bur- one of the stone boxes is Yeshua who is immediately referred to as ied, I would expect to find the tomb for the family in Nazareth or Bethlehem, “Jesus”.
    [Show full text]
  • Lost Tomb of Jesus”
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Biola Professors Respond to the “Lost Tomb of Jesus” A documentary titled, “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” is set to premiere on the Discovery Channel on March 4. The film claims that the 1980 discovery of 10 ossuaries in Jerusalem belonged to the family of Jesus of Nazareth, challenging the Christian belief that Jesus Christ rose bodily from the dead three days after he was crucified. Scholars from Biola University, a private Christian university in Southern California, responded to the claims on Friday with a list of points. 1. The discovery of the tomb is not a “new” discovery. According to John Hutchison, professor of Bible Exposition, “This is not a new archaeological find, but only a rehashing of information that has been known for more than two decades. I think it’s important to remember that this ossuary evidence has been around since 1980, and was the subject of a BBC documentary in 1996. During these years, reputable international scholars and archaeologists have examined the ossuaries and have discounted this theory. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, has said that this theory fails to hold up by archeological standards, but makes for profitable television. Oscar-winning directors like James Cameron and reputable sources like the Discovery Channel generate interest in projects like this; however, nothing new has really been discovered that was not known in 1996. Reputable archaeologists, most of whom are not orthodox Christians, have denied any significance in this find.” 2. The location of the tomb discovered is not historically supported.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Tomb of Jesus
    The Annals of Applied Statistics 2008, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1–2 DOI: 10.1214/08-AOAS162 c Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2008 EDITORIAL: STATISTICS AND “THE LOST TOMB OF JESUS” By Stephen E. Fienberg Carnegie Mellon University What makes a problem suitable for statistical analysis? Are historical and religious questions addressable using statistical calculations? Such issues have long been debated in the statistical community and statisticians and others have used historical information and texts to analyze such questions as the economics of slavery, the authorship of the Federalist Papers and the question of the existence of God. But what about historical and religious attributions associated with information gathered from archeological finds? In 1980, a construction crew working in the Jerusalem neighborhood of East Talpiot stumbled upon a crypt. Archaeologists from the Israel Antiqui- ties Authority came to the scene and found 10 limestone burial boxes, known as ossuaries, in the crypt. Six of these had inscriptions. The remains found in the ossuaries were reburied, as required by Jewish religious tradition, and the ossuaries were catalogued and stored in a warehouse. The inscriptions on the ossuaries were catalogued and published by Rahmani (1994) and by Kloner (1996) but there reports did not receive widespread public attention. Fast forward to March 2007, when a television “docudrama” aired on The Discovery Channel entitled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”1 touched off a public and religious controversy—one only need think about the title to see why there might be a controversy! The program, and a simultaneously published book [Jacobovici and Pellegrino (2007)], described the “rediscovery” of the East Talpiot archeological find and they presented interpretations of the ossuary inscriptions from a number of perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Tomb of Jesus”
    The Annals of Applied Statistics 2008, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1–2 DOI: 10.1214/08-AOAS162 © Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2008 EDITORIAL: STATISTICS AND “THE LOST TOMB OF JESUS” BY STEPHEN E. FIENBERG Carnegie Mellon University What makes a problem suitable for statistical analysis? Are historical and reli- gious questions addressable using statistical calculations? Such issues have long been debated in the statistical community and statisticians and others have used historical information and texts to analyze such questions as the economics of slavery, the authorship of the Federalist Papers and the question of the existence of God. But what about historical and religious attributions associated with informa- tion gathered from archeological finds? In 1980, a construction crew working in the Jerusalem neighborhood of East Talpiot stumbled upon a crypt. Archaeologists from the Israel Antiquities Author- ity came to the scene and found 10 limestone burial boxes, known as ossuaries, in the crypt. Six of these had inscriptions. The remains found in the ossuaries were re- buried, as required by Jewish religious tradition, and the ossuaries were catalogued and stored in a warehouse. The inscriptions on the ossuaries were catalogued and published by Rahmani (1994) and by Kloner (1996) but there reports did not re- ceive widespread public attention. Fast forward to March 2007, when a television “docudrama” aired on The Dis- covery Channel entitled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus”1 touched off a public and reli- gious controversy—one only need think about the title to see why there might be a controversy! The program, and a simultaneously published book [Jacobovici and Pellegrino (2007)], described the “rediscovery” of the East Talpiot archeological find and they presented interpretations of the ossuary inscriptions from a number of perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Lost Tomb of Jesus.” the Good News Is University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem, Said He Balk at the Filmmaker's Claim That the James That Jesus Is Still Attractive
    On March 4, 2007 the Discovery Channel aired a special * Academic Stephen Pfann, a scholar at the An AP Report tells us, "Archaeologists also on finding the “lost tomb of Jesus.” The Good News is University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem, said he balk at the filmmaker's claim that the James that Jesus is still attractive. 2,000 years later and people did not expect Christians to accept the film's Ossuary _ the center of a famous antiquities are still interested in Him. Of course! His is the only findings. "I don't think that Christians are going to fraud in Israel _ might have originated from the name by which people can be saved and there is a spot buy into this," said Mr Pfann, who was interviewed same cave. In 2005, Israel charged five in the heart of every person that longs for Jesus. The real by the film-makers. "But sceptics, in general, would suspects with forgery in connection with the Jesus that is. But did they find the tomb of Jesus? OK, like to see something that pokes holes into the story infamous bone box." let's take a look! that so many people hold dear." * Darrell Bock, a professor at Dallas Seminary, Here are the facts as they stand: * Some Jerusalem residents are excited. "It will whom the Discovery Channel had vet the film mean our house prices will go up because two weeks ago, adds another objection: why * The documentary is produced by Oscar winner James Christians will want to live here," one woman said.
    [Show full text]
  • Talpiot Tomb Analysis Sjp3a
    1 Demythologyzing the Talpiot Tomb: The Tomb of Another Jesus, Mary and Joseph By Stephen Pfann, Ph.D. University of the Holy Land [Pl. 1: Photo of Tabor, Jacobovici, Cameron with CJO 701 and 704] The 2007 documentary on the Talpiot Tomb produced by Simcha Jacobovici and James Cameron in cooperation with professor of religion James Tabor, superimposed the faces of Mary Magdalene, Jesus and Mary the mother of Jesus on the the tomb's ossuaries including those pictured above. This image has captured the imagination of many by attaching the identity of the first century's most famous family to these ossuaries. The documentaryʼs claim that these ossuaries can be identified as those of Jesus and his family is based on the following assumptions: 1) the cluster of names found in the tomb includes the names Joseph, Mary, Jesus and Joseh makes this tomb statistically significant; 2) finding an ossuary a Jesus son of Joseph and, perhaps more importantly of a "Mary also called Mara", perported to be Mary Magdalene, providing the "Ringo", the linch pin, that forms the basis of an astounding hypothesis. 3) the existence of other followers of Jesus, including Simon Peter, in Jerusalem's necropolis increases the likelihood that Jesus' family tomb appropriately belongs in the same area. According to the hypothesis built upon these premises, it would be extremely unlikely if it was the tomb of anyone other than the central character of the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth and his family. However, marshalling in the inscriptional evidence on names at our disposal from the Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries and Dominus Flavit it becomes clear that these names are far from unique, in fact they are among the 1st century Jewish worldʼs most common names.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jesus Family Tomb: the Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence That Could Change History
    BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 46 Issue 1 Article 14 1-1-2007 The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence that Could Change History. by Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino Kent P. Jackson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Recommended Citation Jackson, Kent P. (2007) "The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence that Could Change History. by Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 46 : Iss. 1 , Article 14. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol46/iss1/14 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Jackson: <em>The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino. The JesusFamily Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence That Could Change History. New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2007 Reviewed by Kent P. Jackson secret marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, a secret child A born to their union, and a secret society of believers who main- tained those secrets. To these can be added the Templars, the Masons, esoteric symbols in architecture, persecution by the Catholic Church, star- tling new information about the origins of Christianity, and ancient and modern efforts by the establishment to cover up the truth. If these features of The Jesus Family Tomb are reminiscent of Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, there probably is a reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Ebook ~ Alleged Tombs of Jesus: Church of the Holy
    CMYY3MDY85JR » Doc » Alleged tombs of Jesus: Church of the Holy Sepulchre, The Lost Tomb... Find Doc ALLEGED TOMBS OF JESUS: CHURCH OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE, THE LOST TOMB OF JESUS, TALPIOT TOMB, CALVARY, RENNES-LE-CH&ATILDE;&CENT;TEAU, EMPTY TOMB, SHING&ARING; Download PDF Alleged tombs of Jesus: Church of the Holy Sepulchre, The Lost Tomb of Jesus, Talpiot Tomb, Calvary, Rennes-le-Château, Empty tomb, ShingÅ Authored by Source: Wikipedia Released at 2016 Filesize: 5.01 MB To open the PDF file, you need Adobe Reader computer software. If you do not have Adobe Reader already installed on your computer, you can download the installer and instructions free from the Adobe Web site. You could possibly download and install and save it on your personal computer for later on study. Make sure you follow the link above to download the PDF file. Reviews An incredibly awesome publication with lucid and perfect answers. This can be for all those who statte that there was not a well worth reading. You wont feel monotony at at any time of your time (that's what catalogues are for concerning when you ask me). -- Destiny Hahn This pdf is very gripping and intriguing. It is writter in easy words and phrases rather than difficult to understand. You are going to like just how the article writer publish this ebook. -- Geovany Weimann It is an remarkable publication that I actually have ever study. It really is rally interesting throgh studying period of time. Your daily life period is going to be transform the instant you complete reading this article pdf.
    [Show full text]