NOT Jesus's family tomb

Hi guys..it's been while since i found a blog-worthy topic to talk about..this WILL be long, as far as i can remember what was mentioned to me during about this hoo-ha that attempts to seed doubt in our faith.

For people too busy to read the entire blog, just know that this claim is entirely disputable, and while chances are it may be real, the odds against it are too overwhelming for it to be really entertained. [Even in the scholastic world]

------------------------------------------------------------------

The allegation now is about the archaelogical find that shook the archaelogical world [gasp] through the nosy journalist who thought he uncovered the world's greatest mystery.

A couple of months ago, a condominium construction company was clearing the way to build a condominium [duh] with bulldozers and dynamite one day. Lo and behold, a tomb is uncovered, and several Ossuaries were found, amongst which incriptions were read 'Jesus, son of Joseph' and amongst which other ossuaries read 'Joseph', what seemed like 'Mary Magdalene', 'Matya'. It looked terribly like a family tomb of Jews from the 1st century CE. And there was a mysterious niches empty that looked like it contained another ossuary that has gone missing...

And coincidentally, another ossuary was found some time before that read 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus'

Now, from the bible, we know that Joseph had several sons, 2 of which is Jesus of Nazareth [Jesus Christ], and another was James the just [St James of the 12 apostle]. And amongst the ossuary there was one that read 'Jesus, son of Joseph', as well as what looked like 'Mary Magdalene', as well as an interesting 'Judas, son of Jesus'.

And we know for a fact that rich Jews who lived in the first century DID have family tombs dug out of stone and have their family buried in these tombs in ossuaries, where father, mother, offsprings and maybe grandchildrens in these tombs. This practice was discontinued after the destruction of the Jewish temple around the end of 1st century, so it had to be from that era.

And DNA analysis reveals that the bones in the ossuary of 'Jesus' and 'Mary' have no genetic relations. Thus they are unrelated, and for them to be in the same family tomb, 'Mary', could have been married to 'Jesus'. And there was the ossuary that said 'Judas, son of Jesus'.

Could it be that Jesus did not ascend to heaven, but instead stayed on earth and married Mary Magdalene and had a son Judas?

------------------------------------------------------------------

To Debunk the reports

Apparently, this breaking news is made not by an archaeologist, or a scientist, but a journalist. And if that isn't enough, the journalist published a book, and in it he claimed that he had corresponded with several known authorities who knew their stuff, but had failed to report that they found his claim highly unlikely, and that he was full of himself.

If that's not enough to throw you off this trail, then please do read on.
------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, Jesus is a fairly common name in those time. Not only was Jesus Christ called Jesus, there was another impostor messiah who was known as Jesus the Galilean who tried to call down wicked punishment on the religious authorities but was later tried and tortured and discarded as a madmen. But needless to say, even now there are many people called Jesus, so we KNOW that Jesus is not an uncommon name.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondly, the inscription that the journalist read as Mariamene the 'Mara', of which Mariamene is translated to Mary according to some of the christian writings[Acts of Peter] and Mara was Aramaic for Lord, and there were stories of Mary Magdalene being one of the key leaders of the early church, it was prematurely decided that the inscription did mean Mary Magdalene.

However, if 'Mara' was to be read in aramaic, then why was it written in greek lettering? In fact, 'Mara' is short form for Mary as well. And this 'Mara' and the 'Mariamene' were written in different hand, along with the connecting word may be read as 'and' too, so in all, it could have been simply 'Mariamene', and later when another Mary died, they entombed her in the same Ossuary and added 'and Mara'

So much for Mary Magdalene.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, for the DNA evidence. First of all, we should ask why they simply tested the DNA of 'Mary' and 'Jesus', and not 'Jesus' and 'Judas, son of Jesus' and then 'Mary' and 'Judas' ? that way if Jesus WAS the father, and Mary was the mother, then it can be established that they are indeed married. BUT it wasn't done.

And the argument that they aren't related means that they are married are just preposterous; Mary or Mara could just as well be married to Judas, or Joseph, or anyone else in the tomb. The DNA evidence shows nothing at all.
------------------------------------------------------------------
And the Ossuary of James is another question. Whether it's authentic is still debatable. Since James is the leader of the early church, and he was a christian, and Christians by teachings refer to Jesus as the Lord or the Messiah, why would He [or anyone buring James] refer to Jesus as Jesus? more likely he would have carved 'James, son of Joseph, brother of the Lord/Messiah/ Christ' as befits his title. And James would have long regarded Jesus as his Savior and Lord, and not his brother.

And in fact, the tomb of Jesus was uncovered AFTER the ossuary of James was found. Unless there was a hole somewhere in the tomb, it simply does not make sense that anyone could have stolen the bones without having the tomb found first. So the ossuary of James was NOT from the tomb of 'Jesus'
------------------------------------------------------------------
And not to mention the awful handwriting on some of the ossuary that even the discovering scientist suspect isn't written, but are instead scratches that appeared due to the wear and tear of the material.
------------------------------------------------------------------
And need we mention that Jesus's father was a poor carpenter, and that only the rich Jews could afford to have a tomb dug out of stone?
------------------------------------------------------------------
In all, there are insufficient evidence to point that this family tomb is indeed the tomb of Jesus Christ, nor does it infer that Jesus died on earth instead of having ascended to the heavens.

Interesting enough, it seems that these shocking discoveries seem to happen just before Easter or Christmas, to shaken our belief. The last one was on the Gospel of Judas that happened the year before, which was another dubious source of 'information'. And do take note that these lies never last; they sparkle, and die out. But the bible lives on.

Cheers

brian

disclaimer: i did not come up with these findings so dun bug me if i misquoted anything..or if i mispresented the facts. But i daresay that it's 90% true, so if i do have mistakes, it's typo errors or translational errors by a layperson, but the arguments are valid. [In fact, just go Google 'Jesus bones' and you'll see loads of websites that argue against the discovery for the 'family tomb of Jesus'