Ancient Days-Ancient Pains

It’s hard to believe that a lot of old bones and dust could stir up such controversy, but then again it’s not often that a Hollywood filmmaker comes out with such an extravagant claim as James Cameron's recent declaration of the discovery of the remains of Jesus Christ. As if that were not enough, also included in the alleged find were the remains of a woman whose name, according to Cameron and his supporters, translates into Mary Magdalene, who it seems must have been married to Jesus, as their four children are also included in the family crypt discovered as long ago as 1980 in the suburbs of Jerusalem.

Add to all this the realization that the second Mary is allegedly none other than the mother of Christ herself and we are faced with what amounts to a triple sacrilege. The most profound disputes toward the findings are as follows-

1. Jesus was resurrected from the grave, after which he ascended into heaven.

2. Jesus Christ never was married, nor did he engage in sexual relations, therefore he could not have had children

3. Mary the mother of Jesus in fact never died, according to Catholic Church tradition, but instead was taken bodily and alive up into heaven.

Therefore, these must be the skeletal remains of a different family, albeit with similar names, right? Well, according to Cameron, that would be a near statistical impossibility, as the discovery is all the more enhanced by the markings on one of the ossuaries that identifies the one set of remains as those of “Jesus son of Joseph”.

Aside from the theological disputes, there is one curious response give by opponents of the claim as to why this could not possibly be the holy family. This being that Jesus was a poor Galillean, and as such would have been buried with any family members in an ordinary grave-not in Judea or outside of Jerusalem, but in Galillee, probably in either Nazareth, or maybe in Cana, where he apparently had relatives.

Of course there might well be one incidental bit of admittedly circumstantial evidence that would support Cameron’s claim. What would this be, you might wonder? Well, how about a certain little old ancient book called –

THE BIBLE?

It doesn’t take much digging through the chapters of the Gospels to ascertain that, indeed, Jesus was buried in the outskirts of Jerusalem, such as might well make a fine location for a modern day Jerusalem suburb, I would suspect, in a rock cut tomb that happened to have been donated for the purpose by a certain Joseph of Arimathaea. This Joseph was a wealthy member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, and one of the few members of that august Jewish body who was a sympathizer of the Roman era teacher, rabbi, and some would claim, messiah.

Here’s how it worked in those days. Wealthy Jews had their bodies entombed in caves cut out from the natural rock of cliffs or other sheer natural rock walls and ledges, the entrances to which were covered after the bodies were deposited inside specially cut niches within the inner walls. After an appropriate amount of time, the skeletal remains were removed from the niches and deposited within special ossuarie boxes which were inscribed with the persons name. His or her spouse and children would later join him in the cave in their own special ossuarie box, or at times more than one set of bones would be placed inside one box.

At any rate, this much is in keeping with the gospel records, but there is a small problem. According to the Gospels, the Jews accused the early Christians of deliberately removing the body of Jesus from it’s tomb and hiding it, or perhaps even ignominously disposing of it, after which they developed what they insisted was the fiction of his resurrection and ascension into heaven.

We have to make a lot of assumptions here, the most important of which would be the assumption that Jesus Christ (or Yeshua) actually existed as a historical personage. I am willing to make that assumption, at least for the sake of argument, though insofar as the myth of his resurrection and ascension-well, sorry, I just ain’t ready to go that route. However, if he did exist, then it is easy to conclude that something happened to his remains. Could the Jewish opponents of the early Christians have been correct?

If so, it seems they would have been taking a big chance to either re-inter him and his family within the confines of the old tomb, or to bury him in yet another similar edifice on the outskirts of Jerusalem. This, however, is not taking into account the great Jewish rebellion of 67 AD. It was probably during and after this time that the Gospels were composed, and this would have been during a time when most Jews were expelled from the environs of the city. It might have been a perfect time for the Christians of that day to decide to re-inter the remains, along with the other members of the family that might have been dead at that time.

Let’s make another giant leap of faith that Jesus actually died the way it was described, including his brutal beating by a cat-o-nine tails. This was an implement that contained not just a leather whip, but shards of sharpened stone, metal, and glass. Wielded by a strong and brutal soldier, this device caused excruciating pain and torture. It could rip through flesh and muscle and conceivably chip and scar down to the bone. It was considered so harsh and torturous, a Roman citizen could not be legally flogged with the cat-o-nine tails more than a set number of times, although there was no limit to the lashes a non-Roman citizen-such as Jesus- could receive.

If this really happened, no wonder he died fairly quickly upon his being hung on the cross. But was he really dead in such a way that would be recognized clinically in this day? Or was he just in the beginning stages of death-a coma, as it were-and thus technically dead, just not all the way so?

After a relatively few hours of this agonizing ordeal, a centurion speared him in the side to insure that he was dead, whereupon it was noted that a mass of plasma which had congealed flowed out from the wound. He was then taken down and doubtless unceremoniously dumped on the ground, after which he was handed over for burial to his mother, let’s assume.

Now comes the intriguing part. Is it possible that the spear thrust, along with possibly the thudding drop upon the ground, inadverdently and unnoticeably made his heart once more resume beating? Were the soldiers stationed at his tomb (assuming there really were such soldiers so stationed) drugged? Or were they bribed? Was someone in this or in any other such fashion given entrance to the tomb only to discover that the messiah yet clung barely to life, thus enabling this person to nurse Jesus back to health enough to remove him from the tomb?

The other more fanciful accounts of his words and deeds we can put down to embellishment, but this would definitely explain his resurrection. After all, his period of hanging on the cross has been said to have been no more than about six hours, by far a less amount of time than afforded the average crucifixion, some of which could last for days. In addition, there were no broken bones, no damaged organs outside the flesh and skin, and possibly some bone nicks and at most some slight fractures.

He would have been in a great amount of pain, would have been exhausted physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually, but outside of this, and the very real possibility of infection from his wounds, and loss of blood, no true damage was done. Even the larger side wound from the thrusting spear might have afforded some healing by encouraging and enhancing blood flow.

As such, he could have in a very real sense “risen from the grave”. His ascension into heaven would have come later, through the hearts and minds of his followers, throughout the years to come. As for his actual physical body, who is to say that at some point in the years to come, he did not finally meet his death, and was returned to that old donated crypt, now long forgotten by those few remaining Jews that lived, most of whom had by then moved on to other lands.

Or maybe he was buried instead in Japan. Or Kashmir. No matter where he was buried, his bones might well conceivably bear the nicks and cuts from the cat-o-nine tails, though admittedly they might not after all this time show to the naked eye. Still, with infrared lighting, with x-rays, etc., they might show up. Or maybe they wouldn't. Maybe it has just been too long, and the circumstances of his internment just were not conducive to their preservation. And, it has to be noted, even if these were to show up, as compelling as this might be, it still would not necessarily constitute proof.

It doesn’t really matter in a sense. No matter where he was buried,or whether or not his remains are ever found, or whether even his physical body has long ago entirely faded into the dust of the ages-he is still very much alive.