Tomb of Jesus being opened.

[ad_orientem]

When Constantine's mum went to Palestine and found relics and bits of the Cross by the bucketload, there was nothing to substantiate her 'claim'. Even the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is built on little more than speculation. There is no verifiable evidence that links the tomb with that of the Resurrection. After all, two centuries and more had passed where Jerusalem was little more than a ruin, and the Church based itself at Antioch and Ephasus, rather than the devastated city. Believers were more concerned with sharing their faith and preserving their lives, than guarding spurious sites.

Faith.

[Anchorman]

Faith is fine. But many need to substantiate that faith with verifiabkle fact. Several of the relics the lady was conned into 'finding' including a surviving bit of the 'Cross' - date, not from the first, but the third century. Given that Helena seems to have fallen for toyurist tat, her finding of the tomb wher Christ rose needs to be treated with equal scepticism till archaeology can confirm or deny it.

[ad_orientem]

Faith is fine. But many need to substantiate that faith with verifiabkle fact. Several of the relics the lady was conned into 'finding' including a surviving bit of the 'Cross' - date, not from the first, but the third century. Given that Helena seems to have fallen for toyurist tat, her finding of the tomb wher Christ rose needs to be treated with equal scepticism till archaeology can confirm or deny it.

Well, it seems you've already made up your mind, so there's no convincing you anyway. But then Protestantism is inherently iconoclast. I believe St. Helena.

[Anchorman]

No, I haven't made up my mind, ad_o. I'm simply trying to employ the skills of archaeology to the situation.