Jesus Creed

Jesus Creed


Was Jesus Married? One More Time

posted by xscot mcknight

The news story coming out today that they have found the tomb of Jesus, that Jesus was married to a woman named Mary (presumed then to be Mary Magdalene), and that they had a son named Judah, will surely raise all kinds of questions and problems. I haven’t seen the evidence, but I will be studying what I can find. Here are my first two questions:
First, how can they say this is Jesus’ DNA? Well, what they may have is the DNA of the person whose bones remained in this ossuary, and that person may have been named “Jesus” (if the names are not forgeries), but there is no way to know if this DNA matches the DNA of Jesus of Nazareth until they’ve got some DNA from the latter to match it with the DNA of the former.
Second, how likely is it that the early Christians built and sustained a tomb of Jesus if they — at the same time — were declaring his resurrection and ascension, and were undergoing persecution for the following him? What this tomb requires is a long-term preservation of the remains of the members of Jesus’ so-called family. Unlikely to the extreme.
I’ll be editing this post as I learn more.
Ben Witherington has already posted on it; he’s been involved with a similar project and has some clear information.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(51)
post a comment
Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 8:42 am


Here’s the link to the Discovery Channel article and announcement of a documentary on March 4 at 9 p.m. ET/PT.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 26, 2007 at 8:49 am


Dr. Platypus » Blog Archive » Jesus’ Tomb?

[...] Scot McKnight has two pertinent questions. [...]



report abuse
 

Rick

posted February 26, 2007 at 9:18 am


Ben Witherington, iMonk (M. Spencer), and James White have some initial thoughts posted.



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted February 26, 2007 at 9:40 am


Karen,
I thought I made it clear that I was doing just that … we’ll be looking at this issue.



report abuse
 

Charles Churchill

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:23 am


Quick Question: if Jesus was married, would that mean that he was fooling around on his bride to be, you know, the Church?



report abuse
 

Chase

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:23 am


Like the Armadillo Jackal from Robert Earl Keen, I’m sure Cameron has dollar signs for this one. If there is no resurrection my life is a waste.



report abuse
 

Keith Schooley

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:47 am


Seems to me, the real issue is, is Jesus still in the tomb? Whether he was married or not is completely irrelevant. I don’t believe he was, given that there is no evidence in Scripture that he was; but it makes no difference to my faith. On the other hand, the resurrection is non-negotiable.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:55 am


Jesus’ Tomb Found? at PastorResources Blog – Beta

[...] Read blog responses from James White (and here), Ben Witherington, and Scot McKnight. [...]



report abuse
 

Brian Davis

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:03 am


These news stories and documentaries get tiresome.
Sure, there is archeological and historical investigation being done. However, this type of work goes on in university labs and research halls. What Cameron and Jacobovici are doing is ideologically driven showmanship.
The article Scot linked above notes that “Jacobovici said the discovery should not shake anyone’s belief in the resurrection of Jesus, saying he consulted several theologians in making the film”.
Yes, and we all know what pool of theologians he consulted, don’t we? Do the names Crossan and Tabor ring a bell? Who knows, maybe Gerd Ludemann even has a cameo!
Sorry, but after looking at the documentary website, a website which sends signals of anything but research, my skepticism is even further fueled.



report abuse
 

Julie Clawson

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:06 am


The married thing is no big deal imho, but the rest…
I like Jacobovici. I found his Exodus Decoded documentary to be fascinating. He jumps outside the box of expected interpretation (both conservative and liberal) and looks at things through a very different lense. What bugs me the most is that I’ve yet to find scholars who will engage with him. They either write him off as being to broad (not just a archeologist, or geologist, or theologian) and therefore unable to know anything (when I think his strength is the synthesis) or they say his theories don’t fit into the pre-existing boxes of interpretation and so don’t count. Maybe this will change things – but I fear it may be too emotionally charged for real conversation to occur.



report abuse
 

Scott Lyons

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:19 am


CNN has posted the following article. .
Apparently the BBC did a special on the same tomb 11 years ago.



report abuse
 

Douglass M.Allen

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:37 am


Chase,
Dollars signs, no doubt! However, I find it terribly sad and unloving (to yourself especially and others) to find your life a waste if there was no resurrection. There will probably never be any proof one way or the other on that, but Jesus’ teachings to love God and love others transcends all such controversies and is the only teaching that includes every one of us. Isn’t that teaching of love and inclusion (difficult as it is) give meaning and vocation? Does Abba include his entire family (all of us) or are we Jew and gentile and every other faction fighting ideological, territorial scrimmages and wars that debase and compromise the teaching: Love God, Love Others.
(And Scot, your reply to my Amazon book review reminded me of the halarious scene in the Woody Allen film, Annie Hall, when the young know-it-all was spouting off about Marshall Mcluhan while standing in line at a movie theater. And Marshall Mcluhan happened to be standing in line behind him! Anyway, for reasons of computer illiteracy, I suppose, I can not email you using your elink herein with either of my email providers. Also, I can not put my URL in a reply on the Amazon site. So here is my website which may explain how I can praise both JESUS CREED- LOVE GOD, LOVE OTHERS and LETTERS TO A CHRISTIAN NATION.
http://73circles.blogspot.com/
Peace and blessings to all,
Doug



report abuse
 

RJS

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:48 am


Typical Easter season sensationalism.
Thinking outside of the box is important, as is the ability to synthesize information from a variety of sources. But bad scholarship is bad scholarship and the intimation that DNA analysis has any relevance to the question at hand – assigning the tomb to the Jesus of the gospels – is patently absurd. And I am sure that is not the only example of bad scholarship. The web site feeds on conspiracy theory mentality, on hidden codes and secret societies.
By contrast the site for Jacobovici’s Exodus Decoded has an entirely different “feel” about it.



report abuse
 

April

posted February 26, 2007 at 12:16 pm


Sensationalism and dollar signs aside, I think Chase’s comments are much like Paul’s in 1 Cor 15 —
“But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.”



report abuse
 

Christopher Stukenberg

posted February 26, 2007 at 12:31 pm


The DNA thing does drive me nuts as well. There was a “Digging for the Truth” special on the the topic of the DaVinci Code ideals (or Holy Blood, Holy Grail to give them credit for their work) that was very interesting, but they were merely trying to match the DNA to a living person with ties to Nazereth, as if that proves anything… I have ties to Germany, and I am not Hitler or Dublin and am in no way tied to the IRA… we fish and search for revolutionary things, hoping to make some money. I like Jacobovici as well, but began to dispise Cameron early on when I had to take my date to Titanic for the third time.
I don’t want to sound too judgmental, and will watch and read, but does anyone else feel like we are always being taken advantage of (that ad money will come because so many will know we will watch and read – WOW 2007, get that ad ready – this is your market!)



report abuse
 

Abigail

posted February 26, 2007 at 1:16 pm


I have to disagree. The information I found on the official site (www.jesusfamilytomb.com) looks really strong. The statistics they’ve used seem very promising and accurate. And it isn’t trying to discredit Jesus as a religious figure. I think the information is presented in a really credible way and I’m looking forward to the movie.



report abuse
 

ChrisB

posted February 26, 2007 at 1:35 pm


Abigail and Karen:
The statistics are ridiculous. The odds of going to first century Palestine and finding a woman named Mary were similar to the odds of going to modern Mexico and finding a woman named Mary. Just look at how many are mentioned in the NT. Jesus and Judah are also common names. Just like now, people named their kids from Bible characters like Miriam (ie, Mary) from the Exodus, Joshua (ie, Jesus), and Judah (one of the 12 sons of Jacob).
What they have is 1) a room full of people with very common names, 2) a man who’s DNA doesn’t match that of the woman buried with him (surprise!), and 3) a tomb in the wrong part of the country to belong to Jesus’ family but in the right part of the country for the Pharisees and priests to turn up the body if it here really His.
Christianity could not have started in Jerusalem if there was still a body in His tomb. The plausiblity of this story is ridiculously low.



report abuse
 

Douglass M.Allen

posted February 26, 2007 at 1:44 pm


April, you’re correct, of course, and that’s why I’m a follower of Jesus and not necessarily a Christian. Were not Paul and the gospel writers salemen of a new religion. Each had nuanced messages for their specific target audiences. Jesus also had a target audience- everyone! And whether he was married or not makes no difference. I remember an earlier blog when Scot asked some of the “emerging” evangelicals, and it made no difference to many of them, either. Was Jesus concerned with theological niceties or the spirit of the law? Some of Paul’s message strikes me as contrary to Jesus’s message of love and inclusion or at least beside the point. I don’t deny the resurrection or the tenants of other faiths, either, for that matter except when they conflict with long established scientific facts and theories.
April and others, I love this blog because it is catholic and safe and not at all the mean-spirited or anti-intellectual stereotype portrayed by the Richard Dawkins of this world. Scot’s books (I’m reading THE REAL MARY now) and particularly this blog remind me of the Bible itself with the cross currents of the Jesus Creed vs. the “emerging” theological dogmas. I love this blog because of its hospitality, learned comments, and inclusion; however, the tension between the two poles of love (inclusion) and dogma (exclusion) often seem just under the surface. I remain very saddened whenever others believe the Jesus Creed is contingent upon theological beliefs. On the contrary, IMHO, every belief and action is informed and inspired by the Jesus Creed.
Peace and blessings,
Doug



report abuse
 

VanSkaamper

posted February 26, 2007 at 2:30 pm


Were not Paul and the gospel writers sale[s]men of a new religion[?]
Marketers, perhaps, but not salesmen…unless you consider years of privation, poverty, abuse and martyrdom to be the kind of reward that would keep people selling.
As Scott notes (and as many others, including Aquinas. have observed as well), it’s a tenuous endeavor indeed to put forth any theory that would entail that Paul, Peter, Thomas, and the rest of the original disciples all suffering and ultimately dying (alone, BTW, not at a sales conference or any other circumstance where there was some kind of motivation to stay loyal to the team because they were there with you) rather nasty deaths for teaching and preaching something they knew was a lie, and for which there was no temporal gain of fame, fortune, or Messianic groupie babes.
In addition to the historical implausibility of the claims made about the ossuary (which is now being stated by scholars assailing the documentary), the behavior of Jesus’ original disciples would need to be adeqately and plausibly explained under any such scenario. I’ll be curious to see if the documentary can come close to pulling that off…if it even makes an attempt to do so.
Because, frankly, if I’m John being boiled alive (unsuccessfully), or Thomas being speared, Bartholomew being flayed, Peter being crucified upside down, etc., I’m going to seriously think about recanting, cutting my losses and pursuing a calling other than preaching a crucified, risen and ascended Christ if I know that Jesus and Mary Magdalene are married and raising a family back in Jerusalem raising Immanuel Junior.



report abuse
 

preacherman

posted February 26, 2007 at 3:01 pm


I think if Jesus was married it would have been made known in the gospels. But, if Jesus was married would it really have made a difference in the whole plane of salvation. Really would it really matter?



report abuse
 

Daniel Clark

posted February 26, 2007 at 3:21 pm


To be fair to the statistician it is not the statistics which are ridiculous. The problem lies with the data given to the statistician and the assumptions on which they are based, such as the family of Jesus of NAZARETH, lived in JERUSALEM or that Matthew was part of Jesus’ family.



report abuse
 

Gallagher

posted February 26, 2007 at 3:27 pm


I heard they found the tomb with reference given to Jesus of Jerusalem written somewhere, I might be mistaken. I thougth CNN Headline News mentioned that.
If it is Jesus of Jerusalem, doesn’t the name Jesus of Nazareth bring any difference?
Interesting…



report abuse
 

CPM

posted February 26, 2007 at 3:52 pm


I just read this today from Paul Maier, Professor of history at Western Michigan University. Thought it was very good. Here is the link:
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2007/02/skeleton-in-gods-closet-paul-maier.html



report abuse
 

Jason Dye

posted February 26, 2007 at 5:01 pm


this reminds me of a comment by N.T. Wright. he asked the BBC to excuse him from a discussion with a group of presumable “scholars” who argued that the core of the Gospels is taken from previous pagan rituals and beliefs. He equated the meeting with that of a NASA scientist (or some such) arguing on live tv with a group that the moon isn’t made of cheese.
and, i hate to disagree with you, Mr. Allen, Paul and the Evangelists were not salesmen of a new religion for all the reasons that i would not be a door-to-door salesman of Seppeku. but i believe that VanSkaamper says it better, so i’ll leave it at that.



report abuse
 

Julie Clawson

posted February 26, 2007 at 5:25 pm


#24 The first thing I thought about when I heard about this was Paul Maier’s “thiller” on the same topic – from back in jr. high when I read Christian fiction (I wasn’t allowed to read real fantasy or mystery books…). I was a bit uneasy with Maier accusing them of making money off of this sensationalism when he himself did the same thing.
But like I said before it would be a breath of fresh air to find people to engage with arguments instead of just ridiculing the person speaking them. And I do understand the N.T. Wright quote (#25) to an extent. It’s interesting because he was one of the first scholars I read who engaged the “liberal” theologians my evangelical community had ridiculed as too absurd to give a real answer to (which of course got him labeled as liberal and absurd).
Are people too good to give a reasoned answer or they just afraid to engage outside their box?



report abuse
 

Peregrinato

posted February 26, 2007 at 5:28 pm


(Unfortunately, this “discovery” just reminds of of the old Rudolf Bultmann joke.)



report abuse
 

Chase

posted February 26, 2007 at 6:13 pm


April, you have read me right. It may be assumed to be unloving, and I can engage outside of this box, nonetheless, if there is no resurrection, faith in Christ is useless. And for that matter, faith in Christ that is not useless without a resurrection, is not useful if there is one.



report abuse
 

Jason Dye

posted February 26, 2007 at 7:28 pm


Julie,
“Are people too good to give a reasoned answer or they just afraid to engage outside their box?”
how about bored with answering the same absurd questions over and over again? as if the whole DVC flak last year wasn’t bad enough. and then the “daring exposes” of the Jesus Seminar, which get plenty of popular opinion, and plenty of rebuffs. always around the Holy Season.
but, alas, i thought Witherington answered this one fairly well. at least to my public-school-teaching eyes.



report abuse
 

A Different Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 8:56 pm


how about bored…?
Yeah, I’m looking forward to partially listening to the discussion and to the eventual scientific scrutiny that I hope the claims receive. Some of it is not engaging in foolish arguments or in arguments foolishly ( like 2 Tim 2:23 & Titus 3:9). But I’m also a little too jaded to engage this one fully. I pray wisdom and discernment for those whose jobs it will be to engage it.



report abuse
 

A Different Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 9:49 pm


BTW, just put together something that’s been bothering me all day. I was the first Karen to post the link to Discovery Channel. My husband e-mailed it to me yesterday and I thought it might help Scot research.
Then about 10 minutes later, the other “Karen” posted with the link to the movie. I took it at face value that someone else with my name posted, but now I wonder. The post seems in the tone of promotional material for the movie and double drops the link. Could it be that they are monitoring discussion about this to promote it, maybe even hoping to stir up controversy like the church responded to (for better or maybe for worse) The DaVinci Code? Just thought it was odd that the poster used the same name as my initial post.
Anyway, like I said, I’m looking forward to the scientific peer review process on the claims of this documentary, and until I hear otherwise, I’ll treat it in the same vein I do the Discovery Channel’s documentaries about the location of Noah’s Ark or the latest clue to Atlantis.
I think I’ll stay: A Different Karen



report abuse
 

A Different Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 9:50 pm


Sorry it was more like 50 minutes later.



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted February 26, 2007 at 9:55 pm


Clever, Karen. I checked that URI and it was from the site.



report abuse
 

phil smith

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:29 pm


#30 A different Karen,
I’ve spotted the same phenomena on a number of Blogs. Cunning marketing strategy.



report abuse
 

A Different Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:34 pm


Just goes to show the best reaction might be an open, smart under-reaction.



report abuse
 

Jason Dye

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:42 pm


i’ve also noticed people saying something phenomenally similar, in terms that those who said something slightly negative (w/ ample evidence, btw) about the project were rushing to judgement and that we should all give it a try.
but, that may have been legitimate.



report abuse
 

Jason Dye

posted February 26, 2007 at 10:45 pm


oh, that must be the same thing. it looks like scot took it out.



report abuse
 

A Different Karen

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:18 pm


Sorry, Scot, that it took me all day to bring that nagging thought to the front of my mind and post about it. I pray there’s no harm done.



report abuse
 

phil smith

posted February 26, 2007 at 11:31 pm


Seems the non United States media (where presumably the documentary is not being aired) are taking a more sceptical view of the story:
This from a New Zealand media site quoting Reuters:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/3976165a1860.html



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 27, 2007 at 12:43 am


Baggas’ Blog – Paul’s blog on life, medicine, faith, technology and much more… » The Jesus Tomb

[...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. 3 Responses to “The Jesus Tomb” 1 RodneyOlsen says: February 27th, 2007 at 8:41 am I’m going to be talking to Ross Clifford, Principal of Morling Theological College and President of the Baptist Union in Australia, about this subject on my radio programme tomorrow morning. [...]



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 27, 2007 at 1:43 am


Codex: Biblical Studies Blogspot » Blog Archive » The Jesus/Talpiot Tomb: Around the Blogosphere

[...] Scot McKnight over at Jesus Creed also had a brief post questioning the sensationalism. [...]



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 27, 2007 at 6:27 am


realmealministries.org » The Tomb of Jesus: A Missional Opportunity

Jesus’s Bones?
There has been a lot of press this week about the supposed discovery of Jesus’ bones and the new documentary coming out by James Cameron. Both Scot McNight and Ben Witherington have posts that are helpful to read in terms…—–
[...] New Testament scholars Scott McKnight, Ken Schenck, and my Asbury colleague Ben Witherington have already posted good overview of the historical-critical issues. All three bloggers are well worth our time. [...]



report abuse
 

April

posted February 27, 2007 at 9:12 am


Douglass,
I’m sorry you feel I’m being exclusive in saying saying if there is no physical resurrection of Jesus then my faith, or the faith of others who feel the same, is pointless or my life is a waste. The fact remains that if Jesus didn’t physically rise from the dead he wasn’t who he said he was. Jesus was loving and inclusive and the church needs a dose of that. But Jesus drew some exclusive lines in his ministry, too. He said he is the way, he talked about entering through the narrow gate, etc.
My own faith has evolved much over the past several years. So much so that it sometimes scares me. I grew up in a conservative, evangelical environment. Now I’d consider myself aligned with the emerging church and most of its theology. One thing I enjoy about this blog is having a mature, theologically orthodox voice moderating the conversations. Scot, and other “mature” folks IRL, give me boundaries I feel like I need right now.
Douglass, I’m just not ready to accept that it’s ok if Jesus’ bones are in a tomb somewhere. If someone were to prove that conclusively I’d be devestated.



report abuse
 

Dennis J. Brown

posted February 27, 2007 at 11:33 am


I find the comments interesting especially those that give any weight to the silly ploys of ‘enlightened intelligencia’ seeking to undermine the foundations of the Christian faith.
For me, let them find the ‘tomb’ of Jesus. It matters not what they find. I have learned from the experiences of the disciples, post-crucifixion, that (apparent) disappointment, disillusionment and an element of despair seems to attach itself to our earthly and finite paradigms as we attach ourselves to Jesus. Gods ways and thinking are not ours. The disciples were completely (but temporarily) disillusioned because their paradigm was earthly.
Let this world find out whatever it wants about Jesus, but I have a reliable historical record, corresponding testimonies of millions of believers, and more importantly, a personal experience with this man that assures me that I will be resurrected just as Jesus of Nazareth was.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 27, 2007 at 2:13 pm


The Tomb of Christ, Opened for You « Tyler Ashworth

[...] Scott McKnight’s blog on the Jesus tomb [...]



report abuse
 

Matt

posted February 27, 2007 at 3:04 pm


Doug-
Right you are that you can be a “follower of Jesus” and not a Christian– sort of. You can follow his moral teachings, while ignoring his claims to deity and his mandates about faith in Him alone as necessary for eternal life in heaven and escape from hell. You can follow Jesus the prophet, while ignoring Jesus the Priest and Jesus the King. Except that Jesus prophetically admitted that He was and is the messiah prophesied about in the Old Testament. But praise God that you aren’t claiming to be a Christian. At least you’re honest about it.
Jason (#28)-
Rehashing the same old debates over and over can certain become taxing, even borderline ludicrous. Why don’t people just go do the research for themselves rather than wasting our time on these blogs! Oh wait. We’re not just talking about answers to questions. See, there are people behind those questions. And maybe this blog (or another) is just the place to create enough cognitive dissonance in their minds to actually go and invest the time to look up the answers in a more thorough fashion.
As Christians (indeed as fellow human beings), we have a duty to others to make ourselves available to “be ready to give an answer to everyone” for the hope that we have. And that means giving one answer after another, after another, after another… lest we cease to express the love that Christ has so extravagantly expressed to us.



report abuse
 

Brad

posted February 27, 2007 at 6:06 pm


Ben Witherington, iMonk (M. Spencer), and James White have some initial thoughts posted.
Ben, Michael, James and Scot are unified on a single theological effort? Pinch me for the Rapture has truly come! ;)



report abuse
 

Deirdre Berardi

posted February 27, 2007 at 6:35 pm


This baloney people are feeding into about finding Jesus’ supposed tomb is really making me sick–we Catholics are getting bashed a lot these days because of sins of depraved pedophiles who went into the priesthood some years ago and now no one takes us seriously. Jesus’ supposed brothers and sisters were his immediate family–cousins and close friends, that is what it is like in European countries even these days–I had five friends of my Dad’s that I called uncles who were no relation to me, but he would’ve paid for a tomb if they were alone and had no other family–and this Judah as his son is ridiculous too–Jesus would’ve been as popular a name then as Michael is here in North America–and then people are really burying themselves by saying the Virgin Mary had other children after having Jesus? It’s MADDENING! She has appeared to countless children over the years and made her presence known to us through the miracles at Fatima, Lourdes, and Guadalupe and has said that mankind has wounded her precious heart with these blasphemies–I’d just like to know when goofs like Dan Brown and James Cameron are going to get their heads out of their stupid behinds and look at the proof of our faith and DARE to challenge that!!
Deirdre Berardi



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 28, 2007 at 1:18 am


Areopagus Blog » Blog Archive » Outing

[...] Finally, be sure to read here, here, and there before cancelling Easter brunch. Explore posts in the same categories: General [...]



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 28, 2007 at 9:47 pm


Jesus, the media and Easter at Hismethod

[...] Related // > Ben Witherington – The Jesus Tomb? ‘Titanic’ Talpiot tomb theory sunk > Scot McKnight – Was Jesus Married? One more time > Nat Geo – Jesus’ Tomb Claim Slammed By Scholars > Google News – Jesus Tomb [...]



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted February 28, 2007 at 10:39 pm


Hoystory » Blog Archive » Jesus’ bones

[...] For insight into the numerous flaws of this crockumentary, check out Scot McKnight’s Jesus Creed for two short, easy and damning problems and for a more exhaustive look, Ben Witherington’s post here is helpful. [...]



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted March 3, 2007 at 7:03 am


The “Tomb of Jesus” Hype « Levellers

[...] The “Tomb of Jesus” Hype Published March 3rd, 2007 Jesus Because so many blogs have posted excellent scholarly responses to the Discovery Channel’s hyped up claims to have discovered the family tomb (actually ossuary) of Jesus, including Jesus’ own remains, I had originally planned to say nothing about this. But, I do not know which people may read my stuff who do not know about the good responses to these wild claims. So here’s a guide: British New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham gives a very careful response as a guest post on Chris Tilling’s blog, Chrisendom.? See also Mark Goodacre, Darrell Bock, Scot McKnight, Ben Witherington, Michael Pahl, Byron Smith, and my former teacher, Craig Blomberg. [...]



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Creed. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:15:58am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Our Common Prayerbook 30 - 3
Psalm 30 thanks God (vv. 1-3, 11-12) and exhorts others to thank God (vv. 4-5). Both emerge from the concrete reality of David's own experience. Here is what that experience looks like:Step one: David was set on high and was flourishing at the hand of God's bounty (v. 7a).Step two: David became too

posted 12:15:30pm Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Theology After Darwin 1 (RJS)
One of the more important and more difficult pieces of the puzzle as we feel our way forward at the interface of science and faith is the theological implications of discoveries in modern science. A comment on my post Evolution in the Key of D: Deity or Deism noted: ...this reminds me of why I get a

posted 6:01:52am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Almost Christian 4
Who does well when it comes to passing on the faith to the youth? Studies show two groups do really well: conservative Protestants and Mormons; two groups that don't do well are mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics. Kenda Dean's new book is called Almost Christian: What the Faith of Ou

posted 12:01:53am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Let's Get Neanderthal!
The Cave Man Diet, or Paleo Diet, is getting attention. (Nothing is said about Culver's at all.) The big omission, I have to admit, is that those folks were hunters -- using spears or smacking some rabbit upside the conk or grabbing a fish or two with their hands ... but that's what makes this diet

posted 2:05:48pm Aug. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.