CHAPTER ONE

JESUS COMPLEX:
Is Jesus God?
Have you ever met a man who is the center of attention wherever he goes? Some mysterious, indefinable
characteristic sets him apart from all other men. Well, that's the way it was two thousand years ago with Jesus
Christ. But it wasn't merely Jesus' personality that captivated those who heard him. Those who witnessed his
words and life tell us that something about Jesus of Nazareth was different from all other men.
Jesus' only credentials were himself. He never wrote a book, commanded an army, held a political office, or
owned property. He mostly traveled within a hundred miles of his village, attracting crowds who were amazed at
his provocative words and stunning deeds.
Yet Jesus' greatness was obvious to all those who saw and heard him. And while most great people eventually
fade into history books, Jesus is still the focus of thousands of books and unparalleled media controversy. And
much of that controversy revolves around the radical claims Jesus made about himself---claims that astounded
both his followers and his adversaries.
t was primarily Jesus' unique claims that caused him to be viewed as a threat by both the Roman authorities and
the Jewish hierarchy. Although he was an outsider with no credentials or political powerbase, within three years,
Jesus changed the world for the next 20 centuries. Other moral and religious leaders have left an impact---but
nothing like that unknown carpenter's son from Nazareth.
What was it about Jesus Christ that made the difference? Was he merely a great man, or something more?
These questions get to the heart of who Jesus really was. Some believe he was merely a great moral teacher;
others believe he was simply the leader of the world's greatest religion. But many believe something far more.
Christians believe that God has actually visited us in human form. And they believe the evidence backs that up.
After carefully examining Jesus' life and words, former Cambridge professor and skeptic, C. S. Lewis, came to a
startling conclusion about him that altered the course of his life. So who is the real Jesus? Many will answer that
Jesus was a great moral teacher. As we take a deeper look at the world's most controversial person, we begin by
asking: could Jesus have been merely a great moral teacher?
Great MoraI Teacher?
Even those from other religions acknowledge that Jesus was a great moral teacher. ndian leader, Mahatma
Gandhi, spoke highly of Jesus' righteous life and profound words.
1
Likewise, Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner
wrote, "t is universally admitted . that Christ taught the purest and sublimest ethics . which throws the moral
precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity far into the shade.
2

Jesus' Sermon on the Mount has been called the most superlative teaching of human ethics ever uttered by an
individual. n fact, much of what we know today as "equal rights actually is the result of Jesus' teaching. Historian
Will Durant, a non-Christian, said of Jesus that "he lived and struggled unremittingly for 'equal rights'; in modern
times he would have been sent to Siberia. 'He that is greatest among you, let him be your servant'this is the
inversion of all political wisdom, of all sanity.
3

Many, like Gandhi, have tried to separate Jesus' teaching on ethics from his claims about himself, believing that
he was simply a great man who taught lofty moral principles. This was the approach of one of America's
Founding Fathers, President Thomas Jefferson, who cut and pasted a copy of the New Testament, removing
sections he thought referred to Jesus' deity, while leaving in other passages regarding Jesus' ethical and moral
teaching
4
. Jefferson carried around his cut and pasted New Testament with him, revering Jesus as perhaps the
greatest moral teacher of all time.
n fact, Jefferson's memorable words in the Declaration of ndependence were rooted in Jesus' teaching that
each person is of immense and equal importance to God, regardless of sex, race, or social status. The famous
document sets forth, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights .
But one thing Jefferson didn't answer: f Jesus falsely claimed to be God he couldn't have been a good moral
teacher. But did Jesus really claim deity? Before we look at what Jesus claimed, we need to examine the
possibility that he was simply a great religious leader?
Great ReIigious Leader?
Surprisingly, Jesus never claimed to be a religious leader. He never got into religious politics or pushed an
ambitious agenda, and he ministered almost entirely outside the established religious framework.
When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi
Zacharias, who grew up in a Hindu culture, has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction
between Jesus Christ and the founders of other maj or religions.
"n all of these, there emerges an instruction, a way of living. t is not Zoroaster to whom you turn; it is Zoroaster
to whom you listen. t is not Buddha who delivers you; it is his Noble Truths that instruct you. t is not Mohammad
who transforms you; it is the beauty of the Koran that woos you. By contrast, Jesus did not only teach or expound
His message. He was identical with His message."
5

The truth of Zacharias' point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus' teaching message
was simply "Come to me or "Follow me or "Obey me. Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to
forgive sins, something only God could do.
n The World's Great Religions, Huston Smith observed, "Only two people ever astounded their contemporaries
so much that the question they evoked was not 'Who is he?' but 'What is he?' They were Jesus and Buddha. The
answers these two gave were exactly the opposite. Buddha said unequivocally that he was a mere man, not a
godalmost as if he foresaw later attempts to worship him. Jesus, on the other hand, claimed . to be divine.
6

And that leads us to the question of what Jesus really did claim for himself; specifically, did Jesus claim to be
divine?
id Jesus CIaim To Be God?
So what is it that convinces many scholars that Jesus claimed to be God? Author, John Piper explains that Jesus
claimed power which uniquely belonged to God.
".Jesus' friends and enemies were staggered again and again by what he said and did. He would be walking
down the road, seemingly like any other man, then turn and say something like, 'Before Abraham was, am.' Or,
'f you have seen me, you have seen the Father.' Or, very calmly, after being accused of blasphemy, he would
say, 'The Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.' To the dead he might simply say, 'Come forth,' or,
'Rise up.' And they would obey. To the storms on the sea he would say, 'Be still.' And to a loaf of bread he would
say, 'Become a thousand meals.' And it was done immediately.
7

But what did Jesus really mean by such statements? s it possible Jesus was merely a prophet like Moses or
Elijah, or Daniel? Even a superficial reading of the Gospels reveals that Jesus claimed to be someone more than
a prophet. No other prophet had made such claims about himself; in fact, no other prophet ever put himself in
God's place.
Some argue that Jesus never explicitly said, " am God. t is true that he never stated the exact words, " am
God. However, Jesus also never explicitly said, " am a man, or " am a prophet. Yet Jesus was undoubtedly
human, and his followers considered him a prophet like Moses and Elij ah. So we cannot rule out Jesus being
divine just because he didn't say those exact words, anymore than we can say he wasn't a prophet.
n fact, Jesus' statements about himself contradict the notion that he was simply a great man or a prophet. On
more than one occasion, Jesus referred to himself as God's Son. When asked whether he thought it far-fetched
for Jesus to be the Son of God, lead singer of U2, Bono, answered:
"No, it's not far-fetched to me. Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a
great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they
Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn't allow you that. He doesn't let you off the
hook. Christ says, No. 'm not saying 'm a teacher, don't call me a teacher. 'm not saying 'm a prophet..'m
saying 'm God incarnate. And people say: No, no, please, just be a prophet. A prophet we can take.
8

Before we examine Jesus' claims, it is important to understand that he made them in the context of the Jewish
belief in one God (monotheism). No faithful Jew would ever believe in more than one God. And Jesus believed in
the one God, praying to his Father as, "the only true God.
9

But in that same prayer, Jesus spoke of having always existed with his Father. And when Philip asked Jesus to
show them the Father, Jesus said, "Philip, have been with you so long and you don't know me? Whoever has
seen me, has seen the Father.
10
So the question is: "Was Jesus claiming to be the Hebrew God who created the
universe?
id Jesus CIaim To Be The God Of Abraham & Moses?
Jesus continually referred to himself in ways that confounded his listeners. As Piper notes, Jesus made the
audacious statement, "Before Abraham was, AM.
11
He told Martha and others around her, " AM the
resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he is dead, yet shall he live.
12
Likewise, Jesus would
make statements like, " AM the light of the world,
13
" AM the only way to God,
14
or, " AM the "truth.
15
These
and several other of his claims were preceded by the sacred words for God, " AM (ego eimi)
16
. What did Jesus
mean by such statements, and what is the significance or the term, " AM?
Once again, we must go back to context. n the Hebrew Scriptures, when Moses asked God His name at the
burning bush, God answered, " AM. He was revealing to Moses that He is the one and only God who is outside
of time and has always existed. ncredibly, Jesus was using these holy words to describe himself. The question
is, "Why?
Since the time of Moses, no practicing Jew would ever refer to himself or anyone else by " AM. As a result,
Jesus' " AM claims infuriated the Jewish leaders. One time, for example, some leaders explained to Jesus why
they were trying to kill him: "Because you, a mere man, have made yourself God.
17

Jesus' usage of God's name greatly angered the religious leaders. The point is that these Old Testament
scholars knew exactly what he was sayinghe was claiming to be God, the Creator of the universe. t is only this
claim that would have brought the accusation of blasphemy. To read into the text that Jesus claimed to be God is
clearly warranted, not simply by his words, but also by their reaction to those words.
C. S. Lewis initially considered Jesus a myth. But this literary genius who knew myths well, concluded that Jesus
had to have been a real person. Furthermore, as Lewis investigated the evidence for Jesus, he became
convinced that not only was Jesus real, but he was unlike any man who had ever lived. Lewis writes,
"Then comes the real shock,' wrote Lewis: 'Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about
talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He always existed. He says He is coming to judge
the world at the end of time.
18

To Lewis, Jesus' claims were simply too radical and profound to have been made by an ordinary teacher or
religious leader. (For a more in-depth look at Jesus' claim to deity, see "Did Jesus Claim to be God?
hat Kind Of God?
Some have argued that Jesus was only claiming to be part of God. But the idea that we are all part of God, and
that within us is the seed of divinity, is simply not a possible meaning for Jesus' words and actions. Such
thoughts are revisionist, foreign to his teaching, foreign to his stated beliefs, and foreign to his disciples'
understanding of his teaching.
Jesus taught that he is God in the way the Jews understood God and the way the Hebrew Scriptures portrayed
God, not in the way the New Age movement understands God. Neither Jesus nor his audience had been weaned
on $tar Wars, and so when they spoke of God, they were not speaking of cosmic forces. t's simply bad history to
redefine what Jesus meant by the concept of God.
Lewis explains,
Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the ndians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one
with God..But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant
the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have
grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been
uttered by human lips.
19

Certainly there are those who accept Jesus as a great teacher, yet are unwilling to call him God. As a Deist,
we've seen that Thomas Jefferson had no problem accepting Jesus' teachings on morals and ethics while
denying his deity.
20
But as we've said, and will explore further, if Jesus was not who he claimed to be, then we
must examine some other alternatives, none of which would make him a great moral teacher. Lewis, argued, "
am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ''m ready
to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but don't accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must
not say.
21

n his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was
who he claimed to beGod in the fleshor his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a
great moral teacher. He would either be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex.
CouId Jesus Have Been Lying?
Even Jesus' harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn't fit with Jesus' high moral
and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn't who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was
intentionally misleading everyone.
One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccol Machiavelli in 1532.
n his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and
honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.
Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? n fact, the
Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with
questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable
consistency.
The question we must deal with is: What could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? He taught
that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he wouldn't have been doing it to please his Father. He
certainly didn't lie for his followers' benefit, since all but one were martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship
(see "Did the Apostles believe Jesus is God? http://www.y-jesus.com/apostles_jesus_god_1.php). And so we
are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.
A Legacy
So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a
legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of
most would-be superstars.
Here is another haunting fact. f Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God's Son, he never
would have been condemned. t was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him
crucified.
f enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a
carpenter's son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to
worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus' disciples had fled and Peter had
denied him. Not exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.
Do historians believe Jesus lied? Scholars have scrutinized Jesus' words and life to see if there is any evidence
of a defect in his moral character. n fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus' moral and ethical
purity.
According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus
lied about anything. Schaff argued, "How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful,
selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and
noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?
23

To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To
most scholars, it just doesn't make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus' claims, one must come up with some explanation.
And if Jesus' claims are not true, and he wasn't lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-
deceived.
CouId Jesus Have Been SeIf-eceived?
Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views
about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus' claim to be God. n other words, Jesus was
wrong about his claims but didn't intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually
believing he was the Messiah.
Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus' claims weren't true, then he must have been
insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. "He would
either be a lunaticon a level with the man who says he is a poached eggor else he would be the Devil of
Hell.
24

Most who have studied Jesus' life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was
filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712
78) acknowledged Jesus' superior character and presence of mind, stating, "When Plato describes his imaginary
righteous man.he describes exactly the character of Christ. .f the life and death of Socrates are those of a
philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.
25

Bono concludes that a "nutcase was the last thing one could label Jesus.
"So what you're left with is either Christ was who He said He was---or a complete nutcase. mean, we're talking
nutcase on the level of Charles Manson..'m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for
over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that's far-
fetched..
26

So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus
"only a good moral teacher while denying his deity? nterestingly, the audience who heard Jesusboth believers
and enemiesnever regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people
who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration.
The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just
a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds
about Jesus, stating,
"You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something
worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and
call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human
teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
27

n ere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who
he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce
his former atheism and become a committed Christian.
The greatest question in human history is, "Who is the real Jesus Christ? Bono, Lewis, and countless others
have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be
alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.
id Jesus ReaIIy Rise From The ead?
The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead
after his crucifixion. f they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such
a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several
skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they
discover?
CIick here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made---the resurrection of Jesus
Christ!
CIick here to let us know how this article has helped you.


id Jesus Say hat Happens After e ie?
f Jesus really did rise from the dead, then he must know what is on the other side. What did Jesus say about the
meaning of life and our future? Are there many ways to God or did Jesus claim to be the only way? Read the
startling answers in "Why Jesus?
CIick here to read "Why Jesus?" and discover what Jesus said about life after death.


Can Jesus Bring Meaning To Life?
Can Jesus answer the big questions of life: "Who am ? "Why am here? And, "Where am going? Jesus
made claims about life and our purpose here on earth that need to be examined before we write him off as
uncaring or impotent. This article, "Why Jesus, examines the mystery of why Jesus came to earth, and what that
means to us.
Permission to reproduce this articIe: Publisher grants permission to reproduce this material without written
approval, but only in its entirety and only for non-profit use. No part of this material may be altered or used out of
context without publisher's written permission. Printed copies of Y-Origins and Y-Jesus magazine may be
ordered at: www.JesusOnline.com/product_page
2007 B&L Publications. This article is a supplement to Y-Jesus magazine by Bright Media Foundation & B&L
Publications: Larry Chapman, Chief Editor.
ENNOTES
1. Quoted in Robert Elsberg, ed., Critique of Gandhi on Christianity (New York: Orbis Books, 1991), 26 &
27.
2. Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1946), 43, 44.
3. Will Durant, The $tory of Philosophy (New York: Washington Square, 1961), 428.
4. inda Kulman and Jay Tolson, "The Jesus Code, U. $. News & World Report, December 22, 2003, 1.
5. Ravi Zacharias, Jesus among Other Gods (Nashville, TN: Word, 2000), 89.
6. Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, Handbook of Christian pologetics(Downers Grove, L: nterVarsity,
1994), 150.
7. John Piper, The Pleasures of God (Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 2000), 35.
8. Bono, quoted in, Timothy Keller, The Reason for God (New York: Penguin Group Publishers, 2008),
229.
9. John 17:3.
10. John 14:9
11. John 8:58.
12. John 11:25
13. John 8:12
14. John 14:6
15. bid.
16. For the meaning of "ego eimi. See, http://www.y-jesus.com/jesus_believe_god_2.php
17. John 10:33
18. C. S. Lewis, ere Christianity (San Francisco: Harper, 2001), 51.
19. Lewis, bid.
20. A Deist is someone who believes in a standoffish Goda deity who created the world and then lets it
run according to pre-established laws. Deism was a fad among intellectuals around the time of
America's independence, and Jefferson bought into it.
21. Lewis, 52.
22. J. . Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove, L: nterVarsity, 1993), 57.
23. Philip Schaff, The Person of Christ: The iracle of History (1913), 94, 95.
24. Lewis, 52.
25. Schaff, 98, 99.
26. Bono, bid.
27. Lewis, 52.




CPA1L8 1WC

The Jesus FamiIy Tomb:
Fact or Fiction?
Jesus' Bones iscovered?
Has the tomb of Jesus Christ been discovered in the JerusaIem suburb of TaIpiot?
n a 2007 Discovery Channel TV documentary, producer James Cameron (The Titanic) and Jewish director,
Simcha Jacobovici, attempted to prove that Jesus' burial cave and bones were discovered near Jerusalem.
Cameron and Jacobovici further cited evidence that Jesus sired a son with Mary Magdalene.
f Jesus Christ's tomb has really been discovered, then all of Christian history has been based upon a false claim-
--that Jesus physically rose from the dead, was seen alive by over 500 followers at once, spent 40 days teaching
his disciples, and then ascended into heaven. But before we get caught up in another Da Vinci type conspiracy,
let's look at the facts behind Cameron's claims.
The Facts CIaimed:
1. n 1980 ten limestone bone boxes (ossuaries) dated to the first century, were discovered in an excavated tomb
in the Jerusalem suburb of Talpiot.
2. Six inscriptions were discovered with names similar to or the same as some of Jesus Christ's family and
disciples:
O Jesua, son of Joseph,
O Mary
O Mariamene e Mara
O Mathew
O Jofa
O Judah, son of Jesua.
3. Cameron attempts to prove that Mariamene e Mara is Mary of Magdalene, and that she and Jesus had a son
named "Judah son of Jesua".
4. DNA analysis identifies that tissues from the ossuaries of Jesua and Mariamene e Mara were not related,
raising the possibility they may have been married and had a child.
Checking The Evidence
So, what are the odds that this is Jesus' tomb? According to Cameron and Jacobovici, the statistical improbability
of these names belonging to another family than that of Jesus Christ is 600 to 1. However, scholars challenge
many of the assumptions in their interpretation of the facts. Let's look:
1. t is true that these ossuaries were discovered in an ancient tomb. But thousands of similar tombs have been
discovered in Jerusalem. And ossuaries were often used for the bones of more than one individual. n fact,
according to Dr. Craig Evans, PhD, author of Jesus and the Ossuaries, the tomb carried the bones of about 35
different individuals, and about half were from these ossuaries. Evans also notes that there was considerable
contamination of the site.
2. Are Cameron and Jacobovici correct about the names they assert are on the ossuaries? Not according to
many experts. Some were written in Aramaic, others in Hebrew, and another in Greek. This indicates they were
not buried in a similar time period. t is not even clear that "Jesus is named on any of the ossuaries. Dr. Evans's
personal examination of the ossuary was inconclusive. Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the
Holy Land in Jerusalem, is also unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's
more likely the name "Hanun." Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.
Additionally, it should be noted that the names of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were extremely common in the first
century. About 25% of the women in Jesus' day were named Mary. Joseph was also a common name. And about
one in ten had the name, "Jesua. Dr. Evans indicates that approximately 100 tombs have been discovered in
Jerusalem with the name "Jesus and 200 with the name "Joseph. The name "Mary is on far more.
"Each name with the exception of Mariamene seemed common to their period, and it was only in 1996 that the
BBC made a film suggesting that, given the combination, it might be that family. The idea was eventually
discounted, however, because, as New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham asserted 'the names with Biblical
resonance are so common that even when you run the probabilities on the group, the odds of it being the famous
Jesus' family are "very low."
3. The statistical support for the entire "Jesus tomb theory rises or falls on the question of Mary Magdalene. So
did the name Mariamene e Mara mean Mary Magdalene, as Cameron and Jacobovici attempt to prove? Not
according to most experts. Their interpretation is simply not supported by evidence. Bauckham notes, "The first
use of 'Mariamene' for Magdalene dates to a scholar who was born in 185, suggesting that Magdalene wouldn't
have been called that at her death. "
So, even though Cameron and Jacobovici employed a statistician, Andrey Feuerverger, to support their case, his
numbers were based upon assumptions disputed by the majority of scholars. n fact, Feuerverger himself admits
that the assumptions were given to him by Jacobovici, and that the single biggest factor in his 600 to 1 odds was
the identity of Mariamene e Mara being Mary of Magdalene. Feuerverger defends his role in an interview with
Scientific American, " did permit the number one in 600 to be used in the film'm prepared to stand behind that
but on the understanding that these numbers were calculated based on assumptions that was asked to use."
Yet Dr. Randy ngermanson's statistical analysis of the probability indicates that there is less than one chance in
10,000 that this was the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth.
4. But what about the DNA tests? Doesn't that prove Jesus was in the tomb? Let's look closer at what the DNA
test measured. t took residue (there were no bones to examine) from the ossuaries Jacobovici identified as
belonging to both Jesua and Mariamene, and used mitochondrial DNA testing to see if they were related. The
results proved to be negative, indicating to him that the two individuals were not related maternally. He thus
assumes the two were married. But Bauckham isn't impressed. He writes, "f 'Jesus' and 'Mariamene' weren't
related matrilineally, why jump to the conclusion that they were husband and wife, rather than being related
through their fathers? "
t is the fact that these particular names have been discovered in the same tomb that has fueled speculation that
it really could be Jesus' tomb. But many scholars believe Cameron and Jacobovici have skewed the evidence to
build a case that just isn't there. Additionally, there are many contradictory questions that need to be answered
before one jumps to a conclusion that overturns centuries of historical scholarship.
If It ReaIIy as Jesus' Tomb-
1. Why don't Cameron and Jacobovici cite scholars who disagree with their conclusions? For example, in 1996,
when the British Broadcasting Corp. aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged
the claims. n fact, the vast majority of archaeologists dispute their claim.
2. Since the custom was to bury the dead in their home town, why would Mary and Joseph's family tomb be in
Jerusalem instead of Nazareth? Middle East researcher and biblical anthropologist Joe Zias states, "t has
nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus, he was known as Jesus of Nazareth, not Jesus of Jerusalem, and if the
family was wealthy enough to afford a tomb, which they probably weren't, it would have been in Nazareth, not
here in Jerusalem. Zias dismisses Cameron's claims as "dishonest".
3. Why didn't Jesus' enemies, the Jewish leaders, expose the tomb? They searched unsuccessfully throughout
Jerusalem for any evidence of Jesus' body, claiming that Jesus' disciples had stolen it. They hated Jesus enough
to want him crucified, and would have been elated to discover his tomb, if it indeed existed.
4. Why didn't the Romans expose the inscriptions as belonging to Jesus? Roman soldiers controlled the entire
city of Jerusalem, and they knew his body was missing from a tomb they had been guarding.
5. Why didn't contemporary Roman or Jewish historians write about the tomb? Not one single contemporary
historian mentions the tomb in question.
6. Why was the James Ossuary, which has been labeled a forgery, cited by Cameron and Jacobovici as one of
the reasons for the tomb's validity? CBS News correspondent Mark Philips reports "the archeological
establishment has lined up to label this claim as bunk. This is the second time The Discovery Channel has been
involved in a disputed claim about an ancient tomb, reports Phillips. The man at the center of the previous case
is now facing trial for forgery. Ben Witherington, an early Christianity expert who was deeply involved with the
James Ossuary, says "there are physical reasons to believe it couldn't have originated in the Talpiot plot.
7. Why are Jacobovici and Cameron waiting until just prior to Easter to launch both the book and documentary?
Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards
but makes for profitable television. "They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.
8. Why would Jesus' disciples endure torture for claiming he was resurrected, if they knew it was a hoax? New
Testament scholar Darrell Bock asks, "why would Jesus' family or followers bury his bones in a family plot and
then turn around and preach that he had been physically raised from the dead?"
Asking The Experts
Stephen Pfann, who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight. " don't
think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something
that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear." "How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of
one through 10 10 being completely possible it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Osnat Goaz, a spokeswoman for the sraeli government agency responsible for archaeology, said the Antiquities
Authority agreed to send two ossuaries to New York, but they did not contain human remains. "We agreed to
send the ossuaries, but it doesn't mean that we agree with" the filmmakers, she said.
William Dever, an expert on near eastern archaeology and anthropology, who has worked with sraeli
archeologists for five decades, said specialists have known about the ossuaries for years. "The fact that it's been
ignored tells you something," said Dever, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona. "t would be amusing if
it didn't mislead so many people."
n fact, Cameron and Jacobovici are not the only ones to assert Jesus' tomb has been discovered. Let's look at
others who have cited "evidence in books and on websites:
SchoIar's Verdict
So has Jesus' tomb really been discovered? To find out, let's hear from leading experts.
Jodi Magness, an archaeologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, expressed irritation that the
claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the
media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of
scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said.
Magness noted that at the time of Jesus, wealthy families buried their dead in tombs cut by hand from solid rock,
putting the bones in niches in the walls and then, later, transferring them to ossuaries.
She said Jesus came from a poor family that, like most Jews of the time, probably buried their dead in ordinary
graves. "f Jesus' family had been wealthy enough to afford a rock-cut tomb, it would have been in Nazareth, not
Jerusalem," she said.
Magness also said the names on the Talpiyot ossuaries indicate that the tomb belonged to a family from Judea,
the area around Jerusalem, where people were known by their first name and father's name. As Galileans, Jesus
and his family members would have used their first name and home town, she said.
"This whole case [for the tomb of Jesus] is flawed from beginning to end," she said.
And that conclusion seems to be the consensus of the vast number of archaeologists. As an unbiased scholar
who has been excavating ancient sites in srael for 50 years,William G. Dever shares that view. He is widely
considered the dean of biblical archaeology among U.S. scholars. Dever writes,
"'m not a Christian. 'm not a believer. don't have a dog in this fight, just think it's a shame the way this story is
being hyped and manipulated."
The Resurrection Of Jesus: Myth Or ReaIity
But aside from the tomb, the unanswered question for many is: what evidence exists in the 21st century that
proves or disproves Jesus' resurrection? The recent media attention about "The Jesus Family Tomb calls for an
honest investigation into the evidence. Some skeptics thought there wasn't any evidence and began writing
books to disprove Jesus' resurrection. What surprising evidence did they discover?
CIick here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made---the resurrection of Jesus
Christ!



id Jesus Say hat Happens After e ie?
f Jesus really did rise from the dead, then he must know what is on the other side. What did Jesus say about the
meaning of life and our future? Are there many ways to God or did Jesus claim to be the only way? Read the
startling answers in "Why Jesus?
CIick here to read "Why Jesus?" and discover what Jesus said about life after death.


Can Jesus Bring Meaning To Life?
"Why Jesus? looks at the question of whether or not Jesus is relevant today. Can Jesus answer the big
questions of life: "Who am ? "Why am here? And, "Where am going? Dead cathedrals and crucifixes have
led some to believe that he can't, and that Jesus has left us to cope with a world out of control. But Jesus made
claims about life and our purpose here on earth that need to be examined before we write him off as uncaring or
impotent. This article examines the mystery of why Jesus came to earth.

Permission to reproduce this articIe: Publisher grants permission to reproduce this material without written
approval, but only in its entirety and only for non-profit use. No part of this material may be altered or used out of
context without publisher's written permission. Printed copies of Y-Origins and Y-Jesus magazine may be
ordered at: www.JesusOnline.com/product_page
2007 B&L Publications. This article is a supplement to Y-Jesus magazine by Bright Media Foundation & B&L
Publications: Larry Chapman, Chief Editor.


CPA1L8 1P8LL

Jesus and Mary MagdaIene:
id they have a secret marriage?
Mrs. Jesus
Has history been wrong for 2000 years---was there a Mrs. Jesus Christ? n, "The Jesus Family Tomb, (The
Discovery Channel's TV documentary) director Simcha Jacobovici claims there is "evidence that Jesus and Mary
Magdalene indeed were married and had a son named Judah.
(To see what scholars say about Jacobovici's "evidence see, "The Jesus Family Tomb)" article .
Jacobovici is not the first to postulate a possible romantic relationship between Jesus and Mary. The movie, The
Last Temptation of Christ, and books such asHoly Blood, Holy Grail, and The Da Vinci Code, made a secret
relationship between Jesus and Mary central to their themes.
The Da Vinci Code begins with a page of facts that makes the fictional novel appear to be true in all its
assertions. The book has broken all records on the New York Times best-sellers list, and has been followed by a
blockbuster movie. Author Dan Brown's clever weaving of fact with fiction has convinced many readers that
Jesus and Mary Magdalene really were married and had a child (See "Mona Lisa's Smirk). But is this romantic
assertion just hype to sell books and movies, or is it supported by historical evidence.

Mysterious Mary
Before we examine the evidence for any possible romance between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, let's look into
this person of Mary from the little Galilean town of Magdala. To begin we ask the question, what ancient
documents shed light upon her character and her relationship with Jesus of Nazareth?
The New Testament gospels are the oldest written records of Mary of Magdala. n the gospels Mary is depicted
as a woman who Jesus healed of demon possession. The gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John) present Mary
as a follower of Jesus who listened to his teaching, provided for his financial needs, witnessed his crucifixion, and
three days later was first to see him alive.

Some have said Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, but neither the apostles nor the early church speak of her as
more than one of Jesus' close disciples. The idea that she was a prostitute originated in the sixth century, when
Pope Gregory identified her as both the woman spoken of in Luke 7:37, and the woman who washed Jesus' feet
with her hair.

Although the pope's view was probably influenced by the fact that Jesus had cast seven demons out of her, no
biblical scholar is able to make the connection of Mary Magdalene with the woman in Luke's passage.
Additionally, the New Testament gospels don't even hint of anything romantic or sexual between Jesus and Mary.
So where do conspiracy theorists get the idea? Why all the speculation? For that we turn to documents written
100-200 years after the New Testament gospels by a non-Christian cult called the Gnostics (See "Gnostic
Gospels)". These writings are not part of the New Testament, and were rej ected by early Christians as heretical.
Those who write of a romantic relationship between Jesus and Mary cite a few passages from two of those
writings, the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Philip. Let's look at those passages.
The GospeI Of Mary (MagdaIene)
The notion that Mary Magdalene was special to Jesus is taken primarily from the Gospel of Mary. This Gnostic
gospel is not part of the New Testament, and was written by an unknown author in the last half of the second
century, or about one hundred fifty years after Jesus' death. No eyewitnesses, including Mary, would have been
alive at the time it was written (about 150 A. D.). Such a late date means the Gospel of Mary could not have been
written by an eyewitness of Jesus, and no one knows who wrote it.
One verse in the Gospel of Mary refers to Mary Magdalene as Jesus' favorite disciple, saying he loved Mary
"more than us (meaning his disciples). n another verse Peter supposedly told Mary, "Sister, we know the savior
loved you more than any other woman. Yet nothing written in The Gospel of Mary speaks of a romance or
sexual relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus.
The GospeI Of PhiIip
The Da Vinci Code bases its claim that Jesus and Mary were married and had a child primarily upon one solitary
verse in the Gnostic Gospel of Philip that indicates Jesus and Mary were "companions. This verse reads:
(Brackets appear where words of the document are missing or illegible)
"Three women always walked with the master: Mary his mother, [] sister, and Mary of Magdala, who is called his
companion (koinonos). For "Mary is the name of his sister, his mother and his companion (koinonos)."
n The Da Vinci Code, fictional expert Sir Leigh Teabing proffers that the word for companion (koinonos) could
mean spouse. But according to scholars, that is an unlikely interpretation. To begin, the word generally used for
wife in New Testament Greek is "gune, not "koinonos. Ben Witherington , writing in Biblical Archaeological
Review, addressed this very point:
"There was another Greek word, gune, which would have made this clear. t is much more likely that koinonos
here means "sister in the spiritual sense since that is how it is used elsewhere in this sort of literature. n any
case, this text does not clearly say or even suggest that Jesus was married, much less married to Mary
Magdalene.
1
"
There is also a single verse in the Gospel of Philip that says Jesus kissed Mary.
"The companion of the [] is Mary of Magdala. The [] her more than [] the disciples, [] kissed her often on her [].
The other []...said to him, 'Why do you love her more than all of us?'"
Greeting friends with a kiss was common in the first century, and had no sexual connotation. Professor Karen
King explains in her book The Gospel of Mary Magdala, that the kiss in Philip most likely was a chaste kiss of
fellowship.
But perhaps more important is the fact that the Gospel of Philip was written by an unknown author about 200
years after the New Testament eyewitness accounts (See "s the New Testament Reliable and "Mona Lisa's
Smirk).
t is also important to note that, aside from these few questionable passages, there is no other historical
document that even insinuates Jesus and Mary had a romantic relationship. No secular historian, Jewish
historian, or early Christian historian writes even one iota about such a relationship. And since both the Gospel of
Mary and the Gospel of Philip were written 100-220 years after Christ by unknown authors, their statements
about Jesus and Mary need to be evaluated in context of both contemporary history and the much earlier New
Testament documents.
SchoIars' Verdict
But could the early church have destroyed the evidence in their attempt to rewrite the history of Jesus? Of course
that's what Jacobovici, Brown, and a host of other sensationalists are saying. But do scholars agree?
A Newsweek magazine article summarizing leading scholars' opinions, flatly states that the notion Jesus and
Mary Magdalene were married has no historical basis.
2
Perhaps the Gnostics felt the New Testament was a bit
shy on romance and decided to sauce it up a little. Whatever the reason, these isolated and obscure verses
written 100-200 years after Christ aren't much to base a conspiracy theory upon. nteresting reading perhaps, but
definitely not history.
But some remain unconvinced. Perhaps they just want to make history more interesting. Award-winning
television journalist Frank Sesno asked a panel of historical scholars about the fascination people have with
conspiracy theories. Professor Stanley Kutler from the University of Wisconsin replied, "We all love mysteries
but we love conspiracies more.
3


Perhaps all the hype about Jesus and Mary has more to do with antagonists to Christianity trying to humanize the
man who Christians from the very beginning have called "God. (To read more about how the early Christians
viewed Jesus (See "Mona Lisa's Smirk). For example, the apostle Paul said of Jesus Christ:
"Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. He made himself nothing; he took the
humble position of a slave and appeared in human form (Philippians 2:6, 7a).
John, an eyewitness, and one of Jesus' closest disciples, said of him,
"n the beginning the word already existed. He was with God, and he was God..He created everything there
is..so the Word became human and lived here on earth among us."(portions of John 1:1-3, 14).
id Jesus ReaIIy Rise From The ead?
The greatest question of our time is not whether Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, but "Who is the real
Jesus Christ? Was he just an exceptional man, or was he God in the flesh, as Paul, John, and his other disciples
believed?
The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead
after his crucifixion. f they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such
a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several
skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they
discover?
CIick here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made---the resurrection of Jesus
Christ!


as There A "a Vinci" Conspiracy?
"Mona Lisa's Smirk investigates the world's leading conspiracy theory about Jesus Christ. Were Jesus and Mary
Magdalene married? Did Constantine order the destruction of the true records of Jesus Christ reinventing him
into the God Christians worship today?
id Jesus Say hat Happens After e ie?
f Jesus really did rise from the dead, then he must know what is on the other side. What did Jesus say about the
meaning of life and our future? Are there many ways to God or did Jesus claim to be the only way? Read the
startling answers in "Why Jesus?
CIick here to read "Why Jesus?" and discover what Jesus said about life after death.


Can Jesus Bring Meaning To Life?
"Why Jesus? looks at the question of whether or not Jesus is relevant today. Can Jesus answer the big
questions of life: "Who am ? "Why am here? And, "Where am going? Dead cathedrals and crucifixes have
led some to believe that he can't, and that Jesus has left us to cope with a world out of control. But Jesus made
claims about life and our purpose here on earth that need to be examined before we write him off as uncaring or
impotent. This article examines the mystery of why Jesus came to earth.
CIick here to discover how Jesus can bring meaning to life.


Endnotes
1. Ben Witherington, Biblical rchaeology Review, (2004), "Reviews," 30 [3]:58-61, May/June.
2. Barbara Kantrowitz and Anne Underwood, "Decoding 'The Da Vinci Code,' " Newsweek, December 8,
2003, 54.
3. Stanley Kutler, interview with Frank Sesno, "The Guilty Men: An Historical Review," History Channel,
April 6, 2004.


Permission to reproduce this articIe: Publisher grants permission to reproduce this material without written
approval, but only in its entirety and only for non-profit use. No part of this material may be altered or used out of
context without publisher's written permission. Printed copies of Y-Origins and Y-Jesus magazine may be
ordered at: www.JesusOnline.com/product_page
2007 B&L Publications. This article is a supplement to Y-Jesus magazine by Bright Media Foundation & B&L
Publications: Larry Chapman, Chief Editor.


















CPA1L8