Alessandra Stanley reviews the James Cameron’s documentary about the discovery of the supposed burial tomb of Jesus and finds it to be less than meets the eye:
The archaeological arguments are plausible but not persuasive: this is a breakthrough that relies more on ?what if? than ?here?s how.? And even an amateur can see that the ifs are stacked to support one hypothesis. But it is a fashionable one. Early Christian Gospels suggesting that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus and a respected apostle in her own right, not a fallen woman, are the foundation of Gnostic studies by scholars like Elaine Pagels ? as well as of the plot of the Dan Brown best seller ?The Da Vinci Code.?
The filmmakers get around reasonable doubt with the twin pillars of cable documentaries: hokey costume drama re-enactments and state-of-the-art robotic cameras that see around corners and down dark holes. And to add a fillip of legitimacy, the Discovery Channel will follow the film with a panel discussion led by Ted Koppel.
As I suspected given Cameron’s involvement, this sounds more like showmanship than scholarship. I’ll probably TiVo it anyway because it sounds like an intriguing story, but the odds that it’s true seem remote.
March 3rd, 2007 at 1:11 pm
I’ve written a comprehensive rebuttal of the films claims. Please read it and decide for yourself whether or not the film claims are solid or a hoax.
You will find it at extremetheology.com
March 5th, 2007 at 1:32 am
I just finished watching the Cameron special & the follow up with Koppel. The show itself was interesting, compelling, dramatic & entertaining. I didn’t view it as definitive archaelogical & scientific conclusions. From the information presented in the show, I deciphered that a lot more work needs to be done to establish any kind of “facts”. Personally I agree & disagree with both sides. One thing I know for sure is that I didn’t need Koppel & his ultra conservative cronies to warn me to take a critical viewpoint of the ideas expressed. Cameron’s special portrayed possibilities & ideas. Nothing more & nothing less. It is condescending & insulting for Discovery to think people needed that follow up to draw thier own responsible conclusions. And Koppel… WTF. If I remember correctly, isn’t he involved in an upcoming show which dramatizes the idea that our childrens children will be fighting a war for generations to come. How do they know? The “fact” is they don’t. It’s speculation, drama, an idea. Does that make it any less news worthy? Not in my opinion & neither is Cameron’s special any less worhty. It seems to me far more irresponsible to speculate about the future as opposed to the past. Cameron’s special is based on ideas that have been around for sometime now & have some shreds of “evidence” to back them up. Koppel hinted that ideas in the Cameron special were biased & unfounded. He even cited statements by people involved in the “evidence gathering” & made pointed comments to lead us to believe they had been misquoted or taken out of context. I guess they weren’t passionate enough about thier misquoted comments to appear on his show live, by phone or any other outlet for that matter. Koppel & his gang of right wingers even said that the Cameron special didn’t present all the pertinent information on both sides of the theories. Did Koppel & his producers include every word they exchanged over the phone with the specials detractors or, did they just include the excerpts which leaned to contrary thinking? He then went on to undermine our own knowledge by hinting that he himself never speculated on his news casts because he was a jouranlist & not a film maker. Is thier a difference? By now, I think everyone is well aware that the media is sensationalized & highly speculative at the very least. To me, the major network news bureaus suggest they are the ultimate factual, informative, unbiased information outlets in the world. I guess they have never overblown facts to draw on public interest. Right? Anyway… the opinion I take away from all of this is obviously we can get much closer to the truth with more scientific work on the ossuaries & the tomb itself. Why isn’t every religious, scientific & theological community on the doorstep of the IAA screaming for further study? If faith & belief are truly unshakeable & unwavering then I can’t see any logical reason why that damn tomb isn’t open right now & why the ossuaries themselves aren’t in the hands of the proper investigators with the supervision of the religious authorities. Everyone works together, everone learns together & in the end every one is better off.. together.