“I GUESS THIS MEANS WE’RE JEWISH.” Part 1 of 3 Reactions to The Tomb of Jesus Controversy

At least that was my roommate’s reaction to the recent announcement of a Discovery Channel documentary. In case you’ve been living under a rock for the last week, producer James Cameron (Titanic, Terminator, Aliens) and Emmy winner Simcha Jacobovici recently announced the debut of a new documentary claiming the bones of Jesus Christ (yes, that Jesus Christ), his…ahem…wife, Mary Magdalene, and his son, Judah, have been found in an ossuary in Jerusalem.
I will be commenting through three different posts. That is the plan anyway, who knows if I’ll have more to say later. But, for now, the intention is to begin with a brief explanation of the content in I Corinthians 15 regarding the resurrection of Christ and how it is central to the gospel message, therefore the Christian faith as a whole. Why is this necessary? It is necessary because of the filmmakers’ assertion, and I quote directly from their interview on The Today Show with Meredith Vierra, “[The implications] are huge, but they are not necessarily the implications that people think they are. For example, some people are going to say, ‘This challenges the Resurrection.’ I don't know why. If Jesus rose from one tomb, he could have risen from the other tomb.”
Therefore, I think it is important to begin by taking a look at what The Apostles believed about the Resurrection and whether Jacobovici’s above statement is that of an informed “documentary/journalist filmmaker.” I should also add that while he tries to shrug off any responsibility for the stir he may create behind the lable, "filmmaker/reporter" he is simultaneously vocal about his theological inadequacy. “We are not theologians,” he says.
I wonder then, what qualifies him to conclusively state the impact of his hypothesis on a Faith he, apparently, knows nothing about?”
I humbly suggest that both Mr. Cameron and Mr. Jacobovici are thoroughly ignorant. The conclusions drawn, based on quotes from their interviews on Larry King and Today, do, in fact, reject the truth of Jesus’ resurrection.
Let’s start with Cameron’s statement, “Where you get stuck is the physical ascension to heaven, taking his bones and body with him to heaven, instead of leaving them behind on earth.”
The ignorance in this statement is that of the orthodox, mainstream, and consistent Biblical interpretation/belief that the Resurrection was a bodily resurrection, that is, the body that died is the body that rose. A significant and profound teaching on the resurrection is found in Paul’s 1st Epistle to the Corinthians.

Here, we see clearly that the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is at the very heart of the Gospel. It is the very foundation for the Christian Faith. Without it, we are liars to be rightfully pitied by the entire world. But let’s look at what Paul says.

He begins in 15:1 with this statement, “Moreover, brothers, I declare to you the gospel…” he defines it (the gospel) in verses 3 and 4, “For I delivered to you first of all that which I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures…”
He then goes on to give account of the eyewitnesses (500 +) that saw and recognized Jesus after the resurrection.

His entire purpose in summarizing the gospel message here is to teach them about not just Christ’s resurrection, but the resurrection of the believer as well. He goes on in verse 12, “Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty.”

Paul’s audience is suffering from a misunderstanding regarding their eternal fate. Possibly stemming from a prominent belief in dualism, the idea that the material is evil and the spiritual is good. Therefore, the train of thought goes something like this, “if material is evil, and my body is material, I won’t be resurrected when I die, therefore, there is no resurrection, therefore, let’s party like it’s 1999!” Ok, so I made up that last part, but this is basically the thing Paul is responding to. An interesting note to make is that despite the Corinthians’ confusion, their presupposition is that resurrection involves their bodies. Hmm.

So, Paul continues with his defense in verse 35, “But someone may ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?’ How foolish! What you sow does not come to live unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or something else.”
Paul continues with a set of illustrations along this line of reasoning, concluding, “So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.”

Indulge me a bit here. I think the nature of the biblical teaching on the resurrection is painfully obvious if you just replace the pronouns in the above verse. “The body that is sown is perishable, [the body] is raised imperishable; [the body] is sown in dishonor, [the body] is raised in glory; [the body] is sown in weakness, [the body] is raised in power; [the body] is sown a natural body, [the body] is raised a spiritual body.”
A bit repetitive, I know, but I think it emphatically demonstrates the biblical concept of resurrection.

In case you’re wondering, “spiritual body” does not mean disembodied spirit, which must be Jacobovici understanding of the resurrection. We've already seen that the Corinthian audience, even in their error, we're unwilling to divorce a tangible body from the idea of resurrection (i.e., "with what body will they come?") Paul defines his terms earlier in I Corinthians. “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

Paul states that there is a resurrection from the dead, and if you love, believe, and serve the One who was raised this resurrection will “change” (I Cor. 15:51) your natural, sinful body to an incorruptible, immortal one; a body defined and sustained by God’s Holy Spirit. Paul makes a very important point in all of this, and, while it does not directly address the current controversy, it would be a disservice to the text not to mention it. His point can be seen in verses like this…
I Corinthians 15:33, “Do not be deceived: ‘Evil company corrupts good habits.’ Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; for some do not have the knowledge of God.”
I Corinthians 15:54-58, “So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass that saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’
‘O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?’
The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

Paul centers his entire message around the idea that Christ’s resurrection glorified God, our resurrection will glorify God, and because we have this glory to look forward to, our lives should be lived to glorify God.

So, Mr. Jacobovici, don’t try to tell us your “theory” is not a rejection of the resurrection. It is not only a rejection of the resurrection but also a rejection of the Gospel itself.