The Jesus Family Tomb: Book & Film {Pre-Release Discussion}

[Anastasia]

Just as a matter of interest, came across this today, thought I'd share....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070227/ap_ ... s_s_burial

[Darb]

Dear Brad: You can post that letter now, with the link to James Tabor's note in CODEX.

The book was officially announced fifteen minutes ago (11AM Eastern Time) - and it has been amazing to watch the response. By the minute, it has been climbing in the rankings. I did not expect this. What I did expect was to see the first negative review within ten minutes. On this, human behavior could be counted on to produce, exactly as expected: "A slick production of dubious merit... Pellegrino, a science fiction writer..."

Of course, none of these reviews appearing over the next 24 hours, whether glowing or negative (and I'm now getting reports of both) can be expected to comment on any specific details about the book itself, because every copy has been sequestered from the moment it came off the press - and none will be released until tomorrow at about 11AM eastern time. Even Simcha and Jim and I have been given, at this stage, only two copies each. So, whether good or bad, it shall be interesting to watch all those people commenting on a work they could not possibly have read - but who believe not having read a work is no obstacle to reviewing it.

See you later,
- - Charlie P.

Here it is ...

Worldwide press conference to be aired, RE members of the scientific team on the Jesus Family Tomb, from New York Monday 26 February 10AM. Media interest is sudden and a little scary. It's dawningf on us that what for me has, throughout been a most fascinating expedition series - a science and writing project more amazing (and at times even more stressful) than the Titanic - may in fact attract as much attention as the discovery of the Titanic. Scary. I will say that, as someone who has sat in a submersible on the decks of the Titanic, and visited the edge of creation in the hydrothermal vents, I was perfectly content to believe that I'd reached exploration's Everest thrice and that it did not matter if nothing so full of wonder and mystery would ever cross my path again. It did not matter. I felt completely priviliged. This, topped that, however. And that's saying a lot.

To be truthful - and especially in the wake of "Ghosts of Vesuvius" and the Ladder 4 repercussions, I did not think anyone would really notice. I thought the book would do almost or maybe at least as wel as "Her Name Titanic" and "Dust," and that it would do well just as quietly. I'm beginning to see signs that this may not be the case. Under confidentia1ity agreements, some in the media have been allowed this month to see the results. Interest has been surprisingly swift and large.

We've signed exclusive with the Today Show and Newsweek through February (more confidentia1ity agreements - natch). Meanwhile, the Discovery Channel will be premiering James Cameron's and Simcha Jacobovici's "The Tomb" on March 4.

The weekend of March 16 came down last month to choosing between the Explorer's Club dinner and the Lunacon. I chose to return to the Lunacon, for what I figured (and hope will be) a relatively quiet weekend around some favorite writers and some good old friends. I'll be speaking about the tomb project that Sunday.

Some news about the discovery is now getting out (or being let out by Discovery Channel, etc.). Please copy post or set up link to Amazon Profile, James D. Tabor - Major News on "The Tombs" Soon to Come. (Easy to find by Google "Tabor, Pellegrino, Jesus"). Tabor has summed it up quite well in about three paragraphs - telling all that can be told at this date.

I will add that work is progressing right now on an unusual process indicated in the Jesus and Magdalene ossuary bio-concretion beds. Results are very preliminary at this stage and nothing more can be said until or unless (and this is a big albeit potentially wonderful "unless") they are confirmed at a level adequate for publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

[Darb]

Dear Brad

You can post everything, now. Things are happening extremely fast. Wonderful and horrible things, simultaneously - which means, all systems normal, I guess. I was warned that the exclusive with Newsweek was in jeopardy because the New York Times was searching for me. Word was put out in Time and other online outlets that the authors could not be reached for comment and were in hiding. I never hid anywhere. We were all eating openly in Manhattan restaurants. I even have some video, filmed by the kids, of me dancing Bill Murray "Ghost Busters" style - in front of the New York Times Bldg, singing, "You can't find me." (Filmed after I heard I was in hiding - I was staying literally within one block of the N.Y. Times Building.)

Meanwhile, word has reached me that soldiers have now been sent to guard the tomb. There is discussion about the possibility that too many people may begin to gather at the NYC Crime Lab, and that the shroud material and other blogical remains may have to be stored temporarily where George Washington's letters and the first draft copies of the Declaration of Independence (with its pronouncement against slavery was scratched out by committee) were stored. Jesus may be spending time in Fort Knox. All of this is catching me by surprise, and a little left footed. This is beginning to feel like science fiction turned real. But then: the future does have a way of becoming history, doesn't it?

As I mentioned earlier, those who could not get the exclusive wrote reviews anyway, making up what the film and book were about and then basing criticisms on their own made-up quotes. I should put the record straight, right away: There is nothing in this tomb that contradicts what is in actual scripture - even the identity of the "Beloved Discple." And nowhere, in any way, shape, or form, did Jim Cameron, Simcha, or I, ever say that this tomb and its contents contradict the Resurrection. In fact, this is what Fr. Mervyn Fernando - who happens to be one of the most brilliant minds I've ever met anywhere on the planet, and who speaks with some authority on matters of faith - had to say about finding the shroud and DNA of Jesus:

December 14, 2004: "Dear Charles: Your querry is interesting, though [officially] hypothetical. The Gospels which relate to the life of Jesus were probably composed between AD 75 and 110. Among the earliest New Testament writings are some of the letters of St. Paul. The 'classical locus' about the Resurrection of the body is in St. Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, end of Chaptyer 15, verse 35 onwards. What he says there would apply to the Resurrection of Christ, too. That is, the risen body of Christ (as understood by the apostle Paul) is a spiritual one, not the material/physical one he had in his lifetime. That physical body would have perished, and if any parts of it (bones) are recovered/identified, it would in no way affect the reality of his Resurrection."

See you later,
- - Charlie P.

[Darb]

Dear Brad: After nearly 1.2 million reviews around the world, most of them written before anyone had seen a copy of the book and most of them based on Joe Zias' melt-down or on rumors that we deny the Christian belief in Resurrection - today the first studied, saner reports come out, by people who have actually read the work before reviewing it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070226/lf_afp/usisraelreligionchristianityarchaeologyfilm_070226170455

See also on Harper site (Google Dominik Crossan) for Crossan's comment.

Also - What's your phone # so we can talk later today and have me give a little back-and-forth on discussion group? Do you want to start a new, post-publication thread?

See you later,
- - Charlie P.

[wolfspirit]

HE needs to put the video of him singing "You can't find me!" on Youtube.



Scott

[Darb]

One of the items of evidence used that this is indeed the tomb they claim is a peer-reviewed statistical survey of all related names used in tombs and documents of that time period. From the survey data, the odds of a random tomb having exactly the right combination of names is 600:1. In addition, they have DNA to show that the bones are related to each other and linked to the tomb where they were interred for a substantial period of time, as well as various dating methods that put the tomb and its contents in the right time period.

The fact that the ossiaries date to around the correct timeframe, and that the names coincide with the bibilical accounts, and that they're related to each other is all very interesting, and certainly worthy of discussion and further analysis ... but what sort of evidence is being put forward that this family are, in fact, the people at the root of the events forming the new testament ? Names and dates, and the fact that some of them are related correctly, are not enough to establish positive identity with figure in The Bible.

Even that 600:1 figure is overstated, because there are a lot of people in the world who were given (or took for themselves) famous names from the body of their faith ... or who shared those names before the events themselves transpired.

For instance, the evidence behind the Shoud of Turin was, if i recall, primarily pinned on the fact that the person it enwrapped was that of a bearded man who was crucified during the general timeframe people expected. However, there were plenty of men with beards who were crucified in those days ... there was no evidence given that the person in the shoud was indeed the person people were claiming.

In any case, I'm very much looking forward to reading the book (which I freely admit that i have not seen yet), so I can see, and weigh, the evidence the authors present for myself. I'm sure it'll be an interesting read ... both for the subject matter, the events surrounding them, and the events that are only just now beginning to transpire as discussions and debate begin to commence in ernest.

[Zomboy]

check this companion website: http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com
It has some pretty interesting and well researched material

[Darb]

I'm hopeful Charlie will register directly here, sometime in the next few days.

[Mr. Titanic]

The fact that the ossiaries date to around the correct timeframe, and that the names coincide with the bibilical accounts, and that they're related to each other is all very interesting, and certainly worthy of discussion and further analysis ... but what sort of evidence is being put forward that this family are, in fact, the people at the root of the events forming the new testament ? Names and dates, and the fact that some of them are related correctly, are not enough to establish positive identity with figure in The Bible.

Even that 600:1 figure is overstated, because there are a lot of people in the world who were given (or took for themselves) famous names from the body of their faith ... or who shared those names before the events themselves transpired.

In any case, names and appearances alone are not enough.

For instance, the evidence behind the Shoud of Turin was, if i recall, primarily pinned on the fact that the person it enwrapped was that of a bearded man who was crucified during the general timeframe people expected. However, there were plenty of men with beards who were crucified in those days ... there was no evidence given that the person in the shoud was indeed the person people were claiming.

Those are very good points to keep in mind. I have a feeling though, that what sustains this hypothesis is the fact that whatever the team did find and research within the tomb seems to echo early Christian writings and belief. At least, that is what I gather at this point. I'm skeptical still, as can be expected but compelled all the while. I really was impressed with what I've learned from Charlie and heard from James Tabor. That is what keeps me interested in looking into the book itself.

I agree with your points about relations and dates. If the corpses were not related it wouldn't be a family tomb... And if it wern't than it wouldn't reflect the burial traditions of that time. Mary, the only one not connected by DNA to the others is another foundation of their conclusions, but anyone could have been married and buried together, I suspect that is common even today. However. I think the prime idea is that the names correspond and single out the family. But still it seems like jumping to conclusions. Why should we bother predict why 'Jesus of Nasareth' wasn't written if all we have is names, the fact it is a family tomb and some dates? I don't know if it is certain yet to even consider those possiblities. But I'll be patient.

[Darb]

I'm not trying to cast doubt on the work before I've even read it (that would be unscientific) ... I'm just giving air up front to some of my own pre-conceived expectations and skepticism, so that I can discuss/explore those, while also looking forward to reading something that may shake them up, or smash them entirely. Sometimes, it's a good thing to have one's assumptions get whacked with a hammer. That's the sort of thing that helps keep life worth living, and human knowledge moving forward ... the surprises and new insights that are always waiting just around the bend.

I love that.

Meanwhile, I'm eager to get my sweaty hands on a signed copy.

[Darb]

I just entered The Jesus Family Tomb into the IBDoF database.

[Darb]

At the author's request, I've de-announced this thread, since it primarily deals with pre-release discussions.

In it's place, I've kicked off 2 post-release threads, and promoted them to sticky status:

Jesus Family Tomb: Ossuary Symbology

Jesus Family Tomb: Ossuary DNA

Some of the material forming those threads was split out from this thread.

[Mod: thread title tweaked slightly.]

[Darb]

Fairly soon, we'll be kicking off an announcement thread, which will endeavour to address some of the rampant disinformation that's beginning to sprout in various places in the mass media.

The moderators are just waiting for some inputs from the author(s), for posting.

[Darb]

I believe The Discovery Channel Special airs this Sunday evening.

[Darb]

I saw the film on The Discovery Channel. Very intriguing !

The Koppel interview afterwards was a bit disappointing however, because the people on the religious side of the discussion seemed rather firmly inclined to dismiss all the science out of hand, as if it has no merit at all. The priest even explicitly stated that he only needed his faith, and that the science was essentially just an attack on the Church, and was of little interest or relevance to the devout. That's all a paraphrase, but that's the essential gist I got from those seated to Ted's left (and the viewer's right).

I think Parks Stephenson's 2nd post on Feb 28th counter pointed that sort of uncurious mindset wonderfully well ... knowledge & inquiry, and faith, are NOT mutually exclusive.

[soapbox mode]

There's a constantly shifting yin-yang between the knowable and unknowable - that's been true forever, and it will always be true. Trying to freeze one side of that inter-dependant relationship just doesn't work.

We were given (or evolved, depending on your beliefs) the capacity for free will, and our human senses, for a reason. What are they there for, if not to be used ? There is, and will always be, room for faith ... but surely faith is/was never meant to be blind and unquestioning, and static ?

If, as a child, I'd never reached forth my hands to embrace my parents, and simply relied on the small trickle of "truth" I'd gained from my umbilical cord before birth ... surely my parents would have been horribly disappointed in me ?

When my Father held my hands and taught me to walk as a babe ... surely he intended me to gain the ability to walk on my own, and one day walk uprightly and proudly amongst my family, and my peers in the community ?

Carry the childhood metaphor forward ... surely the Almighty WANTS us to learn, to grow, to strive, to reason, to build, and to come into the dominion of all that we've been given in mind and body and world, and to in all ways emulate the divine creative process that brought us forth ?

To claim that 'faith alone is enough', and that the human impulse towards self-reason and objective knowledge is of low import ... that just smacks to me of shallow head-in-the-sand-ism. I find such a mindset to be philosophically lazy, and uninspiring.

I, for one, hope to someday behold the naked face of creation, and the Almighty, with sight unfogged by the limits of my poor eyes and finite reason ... and I am NOT content to just sit idle and wait for the ultimate epiphany to be spoon-fed to me, on my death bed. I will crawl, walk, run, jump, swim ... whatever it takes ... in order to read and see and touch and learn and appreciate everything I can in the limited time I’ve been given.

I WANT that shiny red apple of knowledge !
I WANT to KNOW !

We were not destined to remain in blissful ignorance. Not if you read Genesis with both eyes open.

[/mode]

Anyway, that's my pholosophical rant for the day (on the thirst for knowledge vs contentment with dogma).

What did everyone else think about the film, and the post-interview ?

[wolfspirit]

I watched the whole documentary last night as well.

I nearly turned it off after 20 minutes, as the overuse of the word "rare" was seriously getting on my nerves. Hearing the word every 20 or so seconds for a bunch of minutes drove me insane.

Content-wise, it is interesting. There is more research that needs to be done yet, and I am withholding my judgement until that time.

Scott

[Darb]

There is more research that needs to be done yet

Oh, agreed.

My impression is that THAT is one of THE primary points the authors were seeking to make ... that the overall tone is "hey, this is really really interesting, it deserves more analysis and scrutiny, across a wide array of disciplines, and this is what we've been able to accomplish so far."

I'm looking forward to reading the copy I just received, so that I can see what's what.

[mccormack44]

I couldn't watch the follow-through as there was a viewing conflict — but I'm probably glad I missed it, as I would probably have walked out after a couple of the statements from the "religious" side.

How people who profess to follow the Man who said "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free" can continue to deny search for truth has always escaped my understanding.

I agree with you both that we need more study. And I felt the presentation was a bit over dramatic (probably because that is what viewers want), but in general it was balanced and very interesting. I would disagree here and there with some of the tentative suggestions, but this definitely deserves more study.

Sue

[laurie]

My impression is that THAT is one of THE primary points the authors were seeking to make ... that the overall tone is "hey, this is really really interesting, it deserves more analysis and scrutiny, across a wide array of disciplines, and this is what we've been able to accomplish so far."

That's exactly what I thought.

This is not a "We found it - case closed" situation.

And the opposition is showing very little faith in their "Faith" by acting the way they are. It's another example of Christian extremists clinging to their self-created ideology rather than following the teachings of Jesus.

I'm almost hoping the science guys DO come up with incontrovertible proof, just to put the wackos out of their jobs!

[Mr. Titanic]

Oh, agreed.
My impression is that THAT is one of THE primary points the authors were seeking to make ... that the overall tone is "hey, this is really really interesting, it deserves more analysis and scrutiny, across a wide array of disciplines, and this is what we've been able to accomplish so far."
I'm looking forward to reading the copy I just received, so that I can see what's what.

Well it was just like Simcha said himself, he's served his role as a director. It was his task to captivate the public enough to spark scientific interest in the subject. It then becomes the role of the true professionals to take this one step further. The find has been ridiculed for its apparent lack of final, complete conclusions, but I find that may take many years of research and testing to determine, and something had to start the ball rolling, as they say.

[Darb]

I ordered the book just now.

[Mr. Titanic]

I bought mine yesterday, and started reading it today. With all the tests I've had to take this week I've only just finished James Cameron's forward, which is always well written. I love the guy. From what I sense already, this book really doesn't seem to have debunking Christianity on its agenda. That is a relief.

[Teamtunafish]

Sorry to rehash this point, but as I am late to the discussion -

As Charlie says, the idea that SF authors cannot be scientists is seriously flawed. Up unitl recently, most SF writers WERE scientists. My husband, SF/F writer Alexis Gilliland, is a PhD in Chemestry. The late Charles Sheffield had a PhD in Physics from, I believe, Cambridge, although it may have been Oxford. Robert Heinlien started as an engineer, as did Jerry Pournell. The list goes on and on. All of them started speculating on 'what would happen if..." and suddenly had stories. So I think this Vatican thing is, to put it kindly, idiotic.

Just my two cents.