The Jesus Family Tomb:
Have we found the bones of Jesus?
John 20:1-18
A few weeks ago, on March 4th, the Discovery Channel aired a documentary entitled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.” If you saw it, you may have noticed right up front that it was very well done. Obviously behind its production lay a reasonable amount of money and skill. That was because the 2 hour show was directed by James Cameron of “Titanic” fame—that is he directed the highly successful movie entitled “Titanic.”
The primary producer of the documentary was Simcha Jacobovici, a Israeli born journalist now living in Canada. I found the documentary to be highly entertaining and also highly infuriating, at the same time. Though a great watch, the leaps it makes in evidence is nearly criminal.
What does the film, and its supporting book, claim? They claim that a first century burial site found in 1980 in the Talpiot section of Jerusalem is in fact the burial chamber of the family of Jesus. Found there, they calm, are ossuaries which contained the remains of Jesus, his mother Mary, Jesus’ brother Joseph, a Matthew (possibly related to Mary), and Mary Magdelene, whom they posit was Jesus’ wife, and the remains of one Judah, who was a son of Jesus.
Now the Discovery Channel web site, as well as the documentary, clearly state that their find does not necessarily contradict the teachings of the Christian faith. The documentary even features a biblical scholar’s testimony that if this find proves to be true, it would not impact his faith at all. Of course they do not mention the scholar interviewed is a liberal scholar who has rejected the biblical Jesus years ago.
The fact is that Christianity is not simply a faith that rests on belief—it is a faith that rests on historical fact and if those facts would prove to be wrong, the Christian faith is finished.
Among the historical facts lying at the foundation of the Christian faith is the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the tomb. This fact is so foundational to the Christian faith that Paul could say:
1 Cor 15:14
And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.
When the news broke about this claim I emailed Nat, my friend and tour guide in Israel, to ask his opinion. Nat takes classes regularly to keep him up to date on the archaeological discoveries and was well versed on this on. After giving me his slant on this stuff, which was that this tomb has nothing at all to do with the biblical Jesus of Nazareth, he said to me via email:
But if this tomb should prove to be authentic, you are out of a job.
Nat, who is an observant Jew who does not believe Jesus is the Messiah, understands the implications of finding the bones of Jesus more clearly than the biblical scholar interviewed on the show who claims to be a Christian.
Nat was nice enough to offer to get me into a Yeshiva to be trained as a Rabbi. He even suggested that since we live in Ephrata, the other name for Bethlehem, we could simply change our name to the Ephrata Synagogue of the Brethren!
So are these the bones of Jesus?
There is much being written on both sides of this outlandish claim, and I would encourage you to research the information on your own.
Let me make a disclaimer here: This is a sermon not an academic paper. I will be sharing things I will call facts this morning, and I will do so without giving you the supporting sources. If you are interested in by background research, let me know and I will share it with you.
I want to do two things this morning.
First I want to simply and quickly highlight some of the huge gaps that exist in the Jesus tomb argument as it was presented on the Discovery Channel program.
And then second, I want to present the most compelling reason for believing in the Resurrection of Jesus
But before I do that, let me give you a very quick review of the burial practices during the first century. These practices were firmly in place for about 100 years, and spanned the time of Jesus:
• Death, body prepared with spice and wrapped in two pieces of cloth—one around the body the other around the head, with the neck and face exposed.
• Wrapped body laid on a stone shelf or slab in a tomb, either cut out of rock or made from a cave.
• Entrance to the tomb sealed with a rolling stone.
• A year later, tomb opened and the now decomposed remains, mostly bones, gathered up and placed in a ossuary, or bone box, and then the box was placed in a niche in the wall.
• The tomb was then used again for someone else.
The tomb in question is obviously an authentic tomb from the first century. It contained 10 ossuaries, six of which had inscriptions on them.
I should mention that this tomb was originally discovered by contractors digging a basement for an apartment complex. It was in 1980. The tomb was excavated by Israeli Archaeologists, cataloged and the ossuaries stored in their warehouse. The bones that were in them were given a buried according to Jewish requirements.
Here are the six inscriptions and who they are presented as in the documentary.
• Jesus, son of Joseph (Jesus of Nazareth)
• Maria (Mary, mother of Jesus)
• Jose (Joseph, brother of Jesus, as named in the Gospel of Mark)
• Matia (Matthew, a relative of Mary’s. This could not be the disciple, since this is a family tomb and he was not related to Jesus.)
• Mariamene e Mara (Mary Magdelene, who is called the Master, wife? of Jesus.)
• Judah, son of Jesus (Jesus’ son to Mary Magdelene?)
As is often the case, what is said on the program is not nearly as bad as what is not said. Here are a few of them.
Claim: one ossuary has the inscription, Jesus, son of Joseph.
Fact: the inscription “Jesus” is in such poor preservation that it is not possible to translate it with certainty—several scholars refuse to attempt a translation, and at least one other offers a different name.
Claim: finding this cluster of names is very rare, and since the name coincide with what we know of the family of Jesus, it must be his tomb.
Fact: These are among the most common names in first century Israel.
About 10 percent of the men were named Joseph and 20 percent Jesus. About 25 percent of the women were named Mary, or some form of the name.
Do you remember the biblical account of the women standing at the cross during Jesus’ crucifixion?
John 19:25
Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother,his mother’s sister,Mary the wife of Clopas,and Mary Magdalene.
Four women standing at the cross and three of them are named Mary. What is that percentage?
Claim: finding Jesus, son of Joseph, is very rare.
Fact: the name Jesus has been found on 22 ossuaries, three of which said Jesus, son of Joseph.
Claim: Mariamene e Mara is Mary Magdalene, confirmed by the Acts of Philip.
Mary Magdalene is nowhere referred to by any other name than Mary from Magda (her home village in Galilee) until the Acts of Philip, which is a 4th century Gnostic writing of the same dubious content as those used by Dan Brown in “The Da Vinci Code.”)
Claim: DNA testing shows that the remains that were in the Jesus ossuary and those in the Mariamene ossuary are not maternally related—they most likely were husband and wife.
Fact: All the testing proved was that the remains in these two ossuaries did not share the same mother.
What is not mentioned is that the remains of 35 people were found in this tomb, 17 of them inside the ossuaries—more than one person’s remains were placed in any given box. Even if you got accurate DNA you could not be sure whose it was.
By the way, some scholars argue this is the meaning of the inscription Mariamene e Mara—being translated Mariamene and Mara—the remains of two women.
The second thing I want to do is to restate the evidence we have for the Resurrection of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels.
Actually, in the interest of time, I want to restate what for me is the greatest evidence of the Resurrection. Of course, the empty tomb is significant, as are the eye witness accounts in the scriptures, and the prophecies and a host of other things.
But for me, the most compelling evidence is the willingness of the early disciples to die for their faith in the resurrected Jesus.
No one questions that the early disciples preached that Jesus had risen from the grave. No one questions that the belief in a resurrection of Jesus was to these first believers the foundation stone of their preaching.
If Jesus did not rise from the dead you have to account for his remains. Where were they and what happened to them?
The Lost Tomb of Jesus documentary on the Discovery Channel begins by talking about the theory that the Disciples moved the body of Jesus from the tomb of Joseph of Airmaeathea, where he was laid the evening of his crucifixion, to this tomb where the ossuaries were found, some distance away from the old city of Jerusalem.
That idea, that the disciples stole the body, was a fear of the Romans in the Bible—that is why the posted the guard—to make sure it would not happen.
However, let’s supposed the disciple did just that—the snuck the body out of the tomb in the cover of the night under the noses of the Roman authorities, took it to this well marked tomb near the city and hide it for a year, then came back, gathered up his bones and placed them in a bone box and marked it with his name. This was so well know that succeeding members of his family were also buried in this same tomb.
If this is the case, then:
1. What kind of people preach something they know is not true and willingly die for that preaching?
2. Why did not someone else squeal about his false preaching? This tomb was well marked. Family was using it, archaeologists tell us, for three generations.
The preaching of Jesus raised from the dead and the first written documents recording this—like Mark and Matthew—were all written and circulated while eyewitnesses from this time period were still alive.
You see, for me, the fact that there is a Christian church preaching the message of a crucified and resurrected Jesus is evidence of the truth—no one preaching a lie—not one that could easily be proven as such—would have endured the scrutiny of his peers.
Contrary to the Discovery channel disclaimer that what they are promoting has no impact on the Christian faith, I submit that it does. As for me, if the resurrection would be proven false, I would take my friend Nat’s advice and get another job.
You can believe what you want about predestination
and eschatology and you can worship God in whatever style you want and you believe what you wish about the true nature of the bread and the cup in communion and
you can take whatever view you think is right of the salific nature of baptism and you can define miracles and angels and Satan in a variety of ways,and it will make very little difference—
But you cannot deny the resurrection of Jesus without robbing your faith of all its power and credibility.
Jesus is risen.
He is risen indeed.
