Thanks go to Mark Goodacre of Duke University for this short post linking us to a recent paper about the alleged Jesus family tomb. As is typical, Mark clearly and succinctly summarizes the two primary points of weakness in the tomb argument — weaknesses that were noted at the beginning and which still kill the identification with Jesus of Nazareth. But perhaps $imcha Jacobovici can still squeeze more profit and notoriety out of it.
Talpiot Tomb Makes Another Round in the Blogosphere
Mark points out that it contradicts nearly 2000 years of Christian tradition.
The only Jesus of Nazareth that there can be evidence for is the Jesus of Nazareth that does not contradict nearly 2000 years of Christian tradition.
I need this to be clearer — it feels like the statement lacks some context (i.e., it has a displaced or fragmentary feel), so if you can add a bit that would be great.
The context is that somebody has found what he claims is evidence for the existence of Jesus.
Mark Goodacre points out that the evidence contradicts nearly 2000 years of Christian tradition and this is a major strike against its validity.
thanks for the quick reply!
a big question here : correct me if i am wrong, but isn’t the christian doctrine that christ’s body and soul went to the heaven ?
Christ’s body went into the grave; 1 Peter then has him descending into Hades to announce the defeat of the “spirits in prison”; then Christ rose (bodily) from the grave, and went bodily to heaven. (That’s the short summary).