In an article called "Jesus 'Tomb Controversy Reopened" in the Time Magazine website on Jan 16, 2008, reporter Tim McGirk discussed the recent conference of fifty leading archeologists and Bible scholars convened in Jerusalem by James Charlesworth of Princeton.  Their concern was to reexamine the significance of the Talpiot tomb in the suburban hills of Jerusalem, discovered in 1980 and made a recent special on the Discovery Channel, entitled "The Lost Tomb of Jesus."  This tomb was a family crypt containing the ossuaries of several members, including a Joseph, Mary, and especially one labeled "Jesus, son of Joseph."  The conference ended with many doubting but some still affirming the reality of it as Jesus' tomb, thus proving the Gospel resurrection accounts fictional creations. 

    As other blogs on this website on this issue have shown, it is extremely unlikely that this could be the tomb of Jesus.  While expressing doubts himself, Charlesworth, a Methodist minister, says that even if it is shown to be correct, it will still have a positive effect in proving that there was indeed a historical Jesus.  He then adds, "I don't think it will undermine belief in the resurrection, only that Jesus rose as a spiritual body, not in the flesh," concluding, "Christianity is a strong religion, based on faith and experience, and I don't think that any discovery by archeologists will change that."

    Does it matter whether we believe in a physical or spiritual resurrection of Jesus?  Paul certainly thought it did.  Writing against the Corinthian misunderstanding in 1 Cor 15:14 he said, "If Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless and your faith is useless."  He had to mean physically raised, because later (15:42), he said, "Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever."  It matters a great deal whether Jesus was actually raised bodily from the dead. 

    A recent book was published on this, entitled, Buried Hope or Risen Savior: The Search for the Jesus Tomb, edited by Carles Quarles (Broadman and Holman, 2008).  With articles written by such as Craig Evans, Richard Bauckham, Darrell Bock et al., it argues strongly that not only does it matter that we affirm the empty tomb, but that the evidence strongly proves the Gospel teaching that the tomb was indeed empty.  It is implied in the credal affirmation of 1 Cor 15:3-4, "Christ died... was buried... and was raised from the dead on the third day."  No suc h outlandish legend would arise so quickly (Paul most likely received this tradition on his first trip to Jerusalem just five years or so after the event) unless it was based on substantial fact.  Paul even said that the Corinthians could check it out themselves, saying, "He was seen by more than 500 of his followers at one time, most of whom are still alive" (15:5, meaning they could ask these witnesses if they wished).  Moreover, the tomb was well known, and the Jews were never able to show that his body was still there; all they could do was spread the rumor that his disciples stole the body, something they could never do since it was guarded (Matt 27:62-28:10).  Finally, no Jewish group would ever make up a story that had women as the official witnesses, since women were not allowed to be legal witnesses in the first century.  In short, there are good historical reasons for affirming the valaidity of the Gospel accounts of the empty tomb.