A number of things come to mind in response to the documentary on the Discovery Channel. These include the following: (1) There is a clear anti-supernatural bias among those who put together this film. It exists just beneath the surface and peeks out here and there. Naturalism is the presuppositional basis of the claims, and only God knows the motives of these people.
(2) After the show, one of the theologians (whose overall perspective I appreciated) made the observation that we should all be allowed “into the tent” when such discoveries are made. While I understand this at one level, another part of me bristles. Why do I have to work under the auspices of, or within the framework of, those who are anti-Christian in their focus? I absolutely think I must work among all kinds of people; no problem there. But to assume that the naturalistic individuals “own” the tent is part of the problem in the first place. Okay, enough of that.
(3) On a related note, why is it that no apparently strong historically-grounded believer is found among those who are doing this research? If Jesus bones are in that tomb, billions would be traumatized. Yet, few of the people in the show even seemed to flinch at the proposition. Indeed, they appear to relish the thought of locating the tomb of Jesus.
(4) It is sheer ignorance and/or arrogance to act like the discovery of Jesus bones would be no big deal. Either the makers of this film are complete biblical ignoramuses (which might be partly true), or they are very much aware of the fact that this is a potentially earth-shattering find. Yet, they pretend to be going about their work in unbiased fashion. BS!
(5) Art is a wonderful tool, as is story telling. But it is supposed to be a vehicle of the truth, an illustrator of reality, not a means of blurring it. The movie makes questionable or even erroneous statements appear valid by portraying them as they do.
(6) PC very often dominates in our world. We want a story, especially one that involves deception and conspiracy. We love to be entertained by a tale of mystery, an Indiana Jones type adventure.
(7) In all of these interviews and statements, little or nothing is said about the scads of evidence that actually support and give credence to the Christian story and the resurrection. You can’t take one piece of rather uncertain history (ossuaries with uncertain occupants) and then sprinkle in some second to fourth century tales and in the process come up with something that can truly be called valid. What about the early disciples? What about their claims? What about Jesus’ own claims? You can’t just imagine that Mary Magdalene is running around evangelizing the ancient world without consideration of the fact that her message would have absolutely no power if her supposed husband hadn’t actually conquered the grave. The makers of this film act like Jesus’ followers did their business and preached some nebulous message, but how can this be if the one on whom they pinned their hopes was proven a failure? Indeed, if we are going to be fair and historical about it all, are we to imagine that the earliest followers of Jesus were suddenly emboldened to preach a message in hostile territory, a message that Jesus was in fact alive, while they already knew that his bones were being stored in someone’s basement? There are numerous early witnesses to the fact of an empty tomb, a transformed community, and claims that many had seen and touched their once dead Master. You cannot build a vigorous, historically believable theory if it ignores the many, many pieces of evidence that point in an entirely different direction than the one advocated by these film makers.
(8) One of the obvious indicators of arrogance among these film makers is located in their willingness to borrow whatever is convenient to their story. They don’t mind plucking certain passages out of the canonical Scriptures while simultaneously ignoring many others. This is one-sided arrogance run wild. Indeed, even if the tomb were actually that of Jesus, the fact remains that the motives of these individuals are highly questionable. Ted Koppel did a pretty good as highlighting this fact.
(8) At one point, the question is posed about the bad track record of the church. Christians have indeed been guilty of numerous foolish choices regarding science and the like. It is at this juncture that we must be humble and careful. At the same time, though, I couldn’t help but notice the irony and the role-reversal of sorts that had taken place. Here the Scientific high priests were dismissing the religious establishment so far as the proper interpretation of these findings.
Well, enough said for now. I just wanted to take some of my initial thoughts and get them down on “paper.”The truth will prevail without bypassing the facts. It is ours to live with honesty, humility, and integrity, trusting him to accomplish whatever he’s up to.
2 comments:
Hello again Doc and all,
After finally watching the Jesus Tomb documentary and the hour of critical look "debates" following it, I am left with the sad conclusion that a large percentage of Christians will always oppose the truth, regardless of how it is presented. It has been amazing to watch people who regularly oppose critical thought and science hypocritically assert that critical thought and science supports so-called "biblical evidence" in their efforts to debunk this archeological find and associated theories.
Reflect upon the fact that Christian leaders are howling about the truth of this archaeological find and associated theories, but are steadfastly and unabashedly opposed to having to prove the truth about the many dubious assertions and contradictions throughout the New Testament and Christianity. Many of these same people have the gall to complain about "theatrics" used to present these findings, as if Christianity has never turned a profit or stooped to even slicker and far more dubious methods pushing their stories and historical interpretations. It is rank hypocrisy for Christians to attack the presentation of this documentary as unbalanced when Christian history and current activities fall far short of what they are demanding in this situation. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, because what goes around comes around.
Read More ...
Here is Wisdom !!
I agree that a large percentage of today’s Christians oppose anything that is new. But, the same can be said of those of a more secular bent, those who regularly make statements about matters which they have never investigated. If you watched the show with Ted Koppel, it was not the experts who were frantic but the film maker. The fact is that this individual ignored or misrepresented historical evidence in order to support his speculations. The non-Christian archeologist was upset that his field was being misrepresented and, in the name of a sensationalistic story. Koppel even appeared to feel that this was sloppy reporting, which is probably why he took so much of the air time challenging these people.
Have certain Christian leaders begun their howling? Yeah, I think some of them have, and some of it appears overly reactionary. But others, including some of the people present on the Koppel program, were not at all ranting and raving. Indeed, the only ranting was by the man who produced this film, and he, it should be pointed out, is not an archeologist or a theologian or a historian. Indeed, as mentioned already, Koppel seemed to imply that he wasn’t even a good reporter. Even if this guy’s theory is correct, it is difficult to miss that he was the one who took on a fundamentalist persona.
Here are people who intentionally chose the DNA comparisons that were safest and most in keeping with the conspiracy theories. Here are people who ignored the early and reliable evidence of Jesus and felt no need to attempt to explain it in terms of their theory. This, I would argue, is bad science and a biased effort to create a story that sells. Indeed, it is absurd to think that we have once again (coincidentally) been informed at this time of year, Easter, that the truth about Jesus is wrong. This was presented in a theatrically appealing way, which is a good thing. But it should not be used to produce sloppy conclusions.
Regarding the Christianity for profit idea, I totally agree. Too often, the so-called church has promoted garbage, and I have spent a good portion of my time opposing such nonsense. Still, I would add, many secular thinkers have criticized anything religious, which you have described as inappropriate. This cuts both ways.
Still, the best segments of the church, the most reputable thinkers, do not think this way. I’ve read some pretty good blogs by Christians who are both confident in their beliefs and also open to whatever is “out there.” Last night, in fact, I was on the phone for quite some time discussing the possible implications of this should it prove to be the actual remains of Jesus. In one sense, I notice the sloppiness and how much historical data is bypassed in the name of sensational reporting. I have looked at these things for many years, and I am aware of large mistakes in the approach of these film makers. This frustrates me, to be sure. On the other hand, I do not consider myself a mere defender of some segment of believers, as if we must run in fear from the discoveries of life, as if we must disregard the evidence before considering it. As one (Christian) commentator mentioned, truth is truth . . . wherever it originates. As I said to my friend last night, if Jesus is not alive, we will have to do some serious thinking and restructuring of whatever is left. Thus, while I tend to think that a lot of this reporting is less than sound historically, and though I feel a sense of allegiance to what I have investigated and embraced, I also feel like I am walking alongside of everyone else who must deal with the truth, whatever it turns out to be. Ironically, in fact, I am finding that the challenges to faith sometimes provide the atmosphere where faith has the greatest likelihood of thriving. I think it was that sandal-wearing fellow who once said, “The truth shall make you free.”
Post a Comment