I really liked the documentary. I went into it with the deep ingrained view that was drilled into my head from birth, which is all catholic doctrine. Why not ! remember Jesus had a body and when he ascended to heaven he had to leave it behind. I know that no matter how i want to believe it does not make it so. If this is the tomb of Jesus family it changes nothing . Remember he was a good man and in Hebrew there is no word for bachelor. it is god will not mine.

Tina, blai, wa

If such a direct attack were made on the founder of any other religion there would be demands for apologies, at best, or in the case of radical Islam, rioting, burning, and murders at worst. What facinates me is the patience with which real Christians have responded to such attacks on Jesus Christ for centuries. I ask, which group would you rather have among you?

Tristan, W Palm Beach, Florida, USA

To Roy.

Proving a negative is a practical impossibility.

Hey Roy, prove Julius Caesar never invaded Russia. You can't? Then I guess I have the best argument if I say he did, since you can't prove he didn't. *I say this to make a point, not to ridicule*. Similarly, trying to prove the tomb *doesn't* contain Jesus' remains is a fool's errand. The burden is on these persons to make a case, and the "evidence" they adduce to prove their case is, to be exceedingly polite, unconvincing--and self-evidently so.

This is a stunt, not science, not archaeology, not history. But if you're looking for logical, historical, archaeological arguments about the shortcomings of their assertions, they are plenteous and easily found. Just look around.

Robert, Washington, DC

What would be the motives of those who would balk at conducting a completely scientific study in each of the Archaeological Disciplines? The huge challenge facing its Participants would be to Professionally gather and consider all the available evidence before drawing any conclusions. An even Greater challenge will be to arrive at those conclusions DISPASSIONATELY.

Steve, Pompano Beach, FL

Is there still a dispute: whether the Talplot Tomb is Jesus’? Not if you seriously consider all of the facts surrounding the Talplot Tomb and not just the musings of Cameron/Jacobovici. Consider for instance that the original archeologists who found the tomb, completely discount this theory. Ask yourself why there was absolutely no peer review of the theory? Consider there is no historical reference to this theory, except the thin connection part of the show’s conjecture with a 4th century discredited Gnostic gospel? Consider all the other, much more logical explanations for the names on the ossuaries, offered by many respected archeologists. Consider all of the statistical assumptions of the show. Consider why there was no further scholastic discussion over a tomb that was discovered over 26 years ago.

Consider all the facts and regardless of your bias towards Christianity, you will summarily come to the belief that this "documentary" is at best, interesting TV and nothing mo

MBanner, Arizona, US

I am wondering why the archelogical community does not try and duplicate the findings by the Cameron group. Or at least put the ossuraries to testing of its own. Claiming it's not the tomb and debating the results proves nothing. Put it to the test. Is matiname really Mary Magdelene? Is the James ossuary from the same tomb? Do your own petina testing or soem other scientific approach that proves or disp[roves what has been put forth on Discovery. Isn't that what science is suppose to do, verify or falsify the results?

Roy Caudill, Sioux Falls, South dakota

The documentary says: “the remains of Jesus were transferred to a family tomb.” Eye witness reports of Jesus’ death and resurrection say there were no remains in the tomb. When several female disciples went to the tomb they found it empty. Angels told them Jesus had been resurrected.—Matthew 28:6-7; Mark 16:5-6; Luke 24:2-6; John 20:1-13
Peter says there were no remains because Jesus was “put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit.” (1Peter 3:18) Since he was resurrected as a spirit person, God disposed of his body in his own way.
The most important reason there was no body in the tomb is because it was offered to God as a ransom sacrifice for the sin of Adam. Paul said Jesus, “put sin away through the sacrifice of himself.” Christians, he said, “have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ.” (Hebrews 9:26, 28; 10:10) At the Last Supper Jesus said the bread represented his body “which is to be given in your behalf.” (Luke 22:19) His body

Diane Church, Rescue , CA

I missed this pseudo-dicumentary, but, honestly, as has been pointed out by dveral New Testament scholars, the Proper Name "Jesus", or "J(Y)eshu'a", derived from
J(Y)ehoshu'a, (meaning "Salvation from our God") or, alternately, "J(Y)oshu'a" was, a very common among the Jews.

There are, in fact, some fifteen other men named "Jesus" of some importance mentioned by the 1st century Jewish historian Josephus, during this time. This Proper
Namei s mentioned for others , as well, in the Old Testament, as well as in ancient Rabbinica...

The speculation that this particular ossuary contained the bones of the Jesus of Nazareth is highly unlikely, indeed....

Sincerely,

Matthew Danly, Arlington, VA

Thanks to BAR for the Burial of Jesus articles. I don't recall anything from the TV show which either estblished the date(s) the tomb was in use, or it's shape and furnishings which could be compared to the extensive information about typical tombs for various time periods, It leaves the presentation little more that the work of an imaginative film maker with extravagant ideas, but merely a pseudo-archeologist.

B. Carter Pate, Chattanooga, TN

Cameron, ansd his ilk, are after the dollar whatever the cost to truth. That is poor journalism. Unfortunately there will be those who will believe it.

He needs to read Burial Of Jesus for it is excellent in determining with facts that no one knows where the tomb of Jesus is located.

Paul Mobley, Cynthiana, Ky, USA

As an archaeologist I can tell you that this whole controversy is laughable. First of all if Jesus was from Nazareth his name would have been inscribed (translated) "Jesus of Nazareth" on his ossuary, not "Jesus son of Joseph." "Jesus son of Joseph" was a name used only by natives of Jerusalem. Note that when Jesus was crucified, the name they nailed over his head was "Jesus of Nazareth," not "Jesus son of Joseph." Secondly, the tomb in which these ossuaries were found could only have been afforded by a wealthy family, which Jesus's family emphatically was not. Third, after the body had rotted the bones would have been put in the ossuary and buried in the family tomb in Nazareth. The tomb at issue was owned by many generations of Jerusalemites. I don't have a dog in this fight because I am not a Christian but the facts speak for themselves.

Paul, Fairfax, VA

What I find deeply convincing is that academic scholars, not religious ones, say that the science is flawed - in overwhelming concurrance.

Paul, Sacramento,

Don M, in confusing what science actually does, has unwittingly put his finger on the problem. As Benedetto Croce recognized over a hundred years ago, dealing with what we can actually observe (this ossuary) is one thing. Extrapolating that to universals (the virigin birth could not happen) is quite another. The former is what science is really about. The latter is actually a matter for historians since science has nothing to observe.

Rikk , Surry, B.C., Canada

The world is flat. Amazing isn’t it that we don’t all fall off. Too many closed minds and not enough concerted probability studies being conducted. The greatest thing I can imagine on earth would be discovering He has been this close to us all this time. What a gift that would be.

Zoe, San Francisco, CA

What I find amusing is that religious scholars are now saying that the science in this film is flawed, but totally ignore science when it comes to the virgin birth and resurrection.

Don, M, Winnipeg,

And why would you not consider this? Some consider God being male, and having a son. To others this is unblieveable. Truth being stranger than fiction.

Elizabeth, Oakville, Canada

"While Gunderson Bee illustrates why shows like this are still being made: "Here in the US, we don't have things that old. It's just fascinating.""

Um , yes, you do... Human beings have been shown to have been living
in the US for (roughly) 5000 years..

Modern white European 'culture' is not the be all and end all of 'things' ..
Older civilisations were actually a lot more civilised ..

Jonathan Duke, Liverpool, UK

Very funny. This is what you brits call 'dry humor' isn't it?

People can Google this' I rest my case."

Shaun, Chicago, IL.

I believe Cameron claimed he was KING after the movie Titanic was shown. That says it all.

I Hofmann, vancouver, B.C. Canada