Tomb of Jesus???

If you're curious about the show whose advertisements and hype have been blasted all over TV and other mediums, purporting to show you the tomb of Jesus - you know, with the casket and the body and everything - then you should read this article by Chuck Colson. He explains what even the typically anti-Christian "experts" said to discourage accepting the imaginative story presented in the documentary.

To begin with, if you find a tomb marked Joshua (which I'm sure is translated to English improperly, and should be Yeshua, which is Hebrew for Jesus) wouldn't be a big deal. If you remember there is a large book of the Old Testament featuring a warrior-leader of Israel both bearing that name. In the New Testament we find other references to men with that name.

Second, the tomb called this man "son of Joseph." If you remember, Jesus wasn't the son of Joseph. Joseph was his mother's husband.

The mother's name was Mary. So is the name inscribed on a nearby coffin. Of course, that must be the wife of Joshua. And of course, there were no Mary's except Mary Magdalene. Whoops. I just said there was a mother named Mary. And the mother of some of Jesus' apostles was Mary. And Lazarus' sister was Mary. In fact, Mary is the Greek form of Miriam, Moses' sister and famous prophetess of the Exodus. The name is also close to Marah, which Naomi takes to herself. It means bitter. At the time of the Roman occupation, to which these bodies date, surely the Jews found their lives a bit bitter.

Also found was a coffin labeled Judah, apparently. This is supposed in the documentary to be Jesus' son.

The problem? If you look at these facts from a Bible-believing perspective, as I do, then Jesus is not Joseph's son. He was not married. He did not have children. He rose again. So this could not be his body. The argument that Jesus did not rise is as old as the day He rose. But there is no explanation for how the body could have been removed, who removed it, why, or why they would not tell anyone. Most of the apostles died in horrible martyrdom refusing to deny the resurrection and deity of Jesus Christ. Liars don't die for their lies.

If you are a Bible-hating "expert" who has consulted on many anti-Christian investigations into the Bible, or if you are a Hollywood director looking for a shock, if you are one of millions who read The DaVinci Code as a novel but didn't quite shake the feeling that the author made some good - no, great points; then you see these facts differently. Since Jesus was only man, he could not have risen or ascended. We "know" he was married to Mary Magdalene, who was with him at a banquet (while the apostle John or one of the others is then curiously absent) depicted like a photograph by a Renaissance artist over a thousand years later. If he was married, it is only logical that he had a son. When we find a sarcophagus marked Joshua son of Joseph near one marked Mary, so that must be them.

The convincing factor is, which perspective has more consistency, more evidence, more first-hand records? Do the research, if you're wondering. Try Josh McDowell's books: Evidence that Demands a Verdict, More than a Carpenter, and The DaVinci Code: A Quest for Answers.

To God be all glory. Jesus lives!