Cameron finds Jesus's tomb

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:28 am

James Cameron, the Director of Titanic, claims he has found the tomb of Jesus. And that he has also found the tomb where a son of Jesus was buried.

Holy Christ! (literally). If it is proven that Jesus had children, the Vatican will go to court in Florida claiming that JC was also the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:19 am

I just looked at an online geneology site and found that I'm actually his direct male line decendant. It's opened my eyes - and certainly gone a long way toward explaining the stigmata on my wrists and my knack of never having to pay for wine in restaurants.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:27 am

This is old news. I have heard that this site was known before this and nothing came of it. Have to wait until Sunday I think to see the evidence. Read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" for a background. This theory has been around for a millennium.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:11 pm

Archaeological finds pertaining to the OT or NT are made daily. 1000% of them are totally bogus and pure fantasy.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 41

Sensationalistic nonsense and nothing more.

As DrWho said, this has been around forever; Cameron is just out to make a buck.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:25 pm

It is well know in Masonic circles that Jesus had a brother - James - or "Jimmy" as he is known to the Craft.

It was Jimmy Christ who brought Jesus' son also called James or "Wee Jim" aka the Holy Grail, the Sand Royale to the atom heart centre of the Universe which as everyone knows is in Glastonbury.

But they were way too early for the Festival, indeed they were too early even for Rock music and had to content themselves making baskets in a wigwam while Mary Magdalen went out every evening to the Roman barracks near the town.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:10 pm

That is just dumb.

Masonic claims have no real basis. Most claims to marriage and siblings come from Coptic references and a European sect ( I forget the name ) that was crushed by the Catholic Church.

I don't know if he is out to make a buck or not. I would like to see the evidence.

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:25 pm

RedGadge wrote:

It is well know ...

It was once well known that the Earth is flat and that the Sun revolves around it.

"Well known" doesn't make it true.

Baiting Guru Joined: 31 Jan 2007 Posts: 12237

From the tone is it in order to call for an atheist roll call? Or is that out of line?

I'll be #1

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:39 pm

kleindoofy wrote:

"Well known" doesn't make it true.

Right you are!

For example, it has been widely suposed by most new eater members that Both KD and NN are attractive women, whilst the truth is that one is a gay biker-boy and the other an eleven year old geek.

Just goes to show, you can never tell.

I'm not saying which is which.

Baiting Guru Joined: 04 Jan 2006 Posts: 3193

I believe RedGadge had his tongue firmly in his cheek in that post.

The only thing I believe from Holy Blood, Holy Grail, is that it would be extremely unusual for a 30 year old rabbi to be unmarried. Mary Magdelen fits the bill as a wife figure, and why ask Jesus for help at the wedding if he wasn't the host? But he could still have been unmarried. The only person who could possibley know for sure is the pope, who may have access to unexpurgated documents, but if he has he isn't telling.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 am

This topic needs to be kept as a-religious as possible. So I would say that No this is not a roll call for atheists. You don't have be declared religious or not, just be willing to look at the topic with a scientific attitude. My personal opinion is that any message does not depend on the deliverer being married or not. Or whether it had a sibling or not.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:15 am

thud419 wrote:

I believe RedGadge had his tongue firmly in his cheek in that post. ...

Yup. My comment was just for the record.

Baiting Guru Joined: 31 Jan 2007 Posts: 12237

@ DrWho...

How can you keep a topic about the "proof of Jesus as a pile of bones and not to have ascended into heaven as outlined in the NT" as a-religious?

edit.. Well on reflection I suppose YOU can.

edit again.. Any topic on politics, religion or Mac/PC/Linux needs to banned from the internets.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:54 am

The truth is out there folks..

RELIGIOUS ARGUMENTATION LINKS REMOVED. PLEASE TRY TO AVOID RELIGIOUS DEBATES.

SAMV

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:56 am

I think you're going a bit far there. It is feasible that some people might get some internet related work done whilst discussing operating systems.
Religious discussions are the real scroll wheel burners, and Eater does it's bit to help preserve internet normality by locking threads which look like they might prompt several pages of heartfelt tosh from some disgruntled scientist/clergyman.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:19 am

If people start discussing why their religion is best or why others are wrong; this will be locked. I have personal opinions, as I'm sure everyone has, about this but will not express them. Religion is emotional so it is a no win discussion. We therefore don't allow these to go on.

If people can discuss scientific evidence with out getting emotionally involved it can be kept open. But I think we are approaching an end.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:33 am

This is just another grandstanding opportunity for James Cameron. This 'evidence' has been out there for ages. He did the same thing when he took Dr Robert Ballard's work with Titanic and made himself look like the hero of the hour.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:49 am

Yes, I can agree with that about Cameron. He does stand on other's backs.

Dr. Ballard came to an engineering class I had in college (at university for you in Europe) because our instructor knew him. I think he had just found some kind ancient Aegean wreak at the time. He definitely knew is stuff and was very good at it.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:29 am

I think that Ballard's work is fascinating.

However, back to OP. You cannot say that this is a specific person's tomb or sacophagus in this situation. The names were etremely common at the time. Crucifixtion was common, and therefore you cannot say that this individual is the right one. Therefore any 'dna' evidence, while interesting is not conclusive. All that proves is that the individual was from the area or not.

Any documentation or unapproved gospels would have been destroyed a very long time ago. The only reason some of the uncanonical gospels have survived is through being hidden in a location where they were protected by the climate. Other documents are know because they have been attacked by early church writers whose works were approved.

A crucified man was uncovered close to Jerusalem sometime ago. He did date to approximately the 1st century AD. This doesn't actually mean or prove that Jesus's was found and identified. Just as the Kashmiri legend of Jesus travelling to Kashmir in his late teens to early twenties and returned to die in Kashmir is not conclusive proof of historical accuracy. All that shows is that travel and migration for individuals and groups in the ancient world was a lot more prevelent than we have direct evidence for.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:33 am

I wish Cameron would go and find a decent sci-fi/fantasy script and make a decent film for a change... Sad

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:40 am

Can't argue with that.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:41 am

Alternatively he may actually be on to something but it seems a lot of people don't want to hear it.

At least these days the Church will not be burning him to death for having the temerity to have a mind of his own.

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:05 pm

They used to burn people to death for talking crap too, which is apparantly legal now. I had to sit through the bilge that is the film, "Titanic". I can't beleive I sat there and held it in when I could have been taking a two hour piss instead.

Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:27 am

I thought the show was provoking. They definitely made a good case with what they showed. Of course anyone trying to prove their point will show it in the most positive light they can. What bothers me is that if this type of proof was concerning a popular historical figure from the Middle Ages, people would be all over it. But because it is such a volatile topic it is laughed at. I did a report in college about continental drift and how the first scientist to expound this theory was laughed out of his school and scientist were sure it was ridiculous. He had a couple of his students who followed him. It is now a proven accepted theory and scientist would laugh at you if you said it was not true. Someone always has to be first.

The ending was kind of stupid. They let some old woman from the IAA tell them to leave and they just walked away?! They could have pulled some weight if they really wanted to.

And the James ossuary seemed a little bogus. Why would they put "James son of Joseph brother of Jesus". I would think at the time it would not be any reason to single out Jesus as the brother, just the father name. Since family association would only be the important connection though the father.

Anyway, I thought it was interesting.

Cameron finds Jesus's tomb	View next topic View previous topic