quote:

Has the DNA of Jesus Christ been found?

MICHAEL POSNER

Globe and Mail Update

Has the DNA of Jesus Christ been found?

That tantalizing question underpins The Lost Tomb of Jesus — a new book and feature documentary film with potentially profound implications for Christianity.

The two provocative works suggest that ossuaries once containing the bones of Jesus of Nazareth and his family are now stored in a warehouse belonging to the Israel Antiquity Authority in Bet Shemesh, outside Jerusalem.

Although the evidence contained in the film and book is hardly definitive, it is compelling. Inscribed in Hebrew, Latin or Greek, six boxes — taken from a 2,000-year-old cave discovered in March, 1980, during excavation for a housing project in Talpiyot, south of Jerusalem — bear the names: Yeshua (Jesus) bar Yosef (son of Joseph); Maria (the Latin version of Miriam, which is the English Mary); Matia (the Hebrew equivalent of Matthew, a name common in the lineage of both Mary and Joseph); Yose; (the Gospel of Mark refers to Yose as a brother of Jesus); Yehuda bar Yeshua, or Judah, son of Jesus; and in Greek, Mariamne e mara — meaning 'Mariamne, known as the master.' According to Harvard professor Francois Bovon, interviewed in the film, Mariamne was Mary Magdalene's real name.

Related to this article

Follow this writer Follow this writer

* Add MICHAEL POSNER to my e-mail alerts Globe Insider

Latest Comments Comments

* I find it hard to swallow the level of intolerance in here. Wow...

* JL: I am much LESS dramatic than people who pretend to get instructions...

* ........... The fatal flaw of atheists is that they try to refute...

* How can a person who is civil and just but ask's for nothing...

* 180 reader comments | Join the conversation

The Globe and Mail

The bones once contained in the boxes have long since been reburied, according to Jewish custom — in unmarked graves in Israel.

If the evidence adduced is correct, the bone boxes — and microscopic remains of DNA still contained inside — would constitute the first archaeological evidence of the existence of the Christian saviour and his family.

Tests on mitochondrial DNA obtained from the Jesus and Mariamne boxes and conducted at Lakehead University's Paleo-DNA laboratory, in Thunder Bay, Ont., show conclusively that the two individuals were not maternally related. According to Dr. Carney Matheson, the lab's head, this likely means they were related by marriage.

Thus, the book and film raise seminal questions, not only about the early movement of Judeo-Christians that Jesus led, but about whether, as some scholars believe, he might have been married to Mary Magdalene and fathered a family.

Nothing in the film or book challenges traditional Christian dogma regarding the resurrection. But it could pose a problem for those that believe Jesus' ascension, 40 days after the resurrection, was both physical and spiritual. And, if further DNA testing were to link Jesus and Yose with Mary, it would call into question the entire doctrine of the Virgin Birth.

The $4-million documentary is the work two Canadians — Emmy-award winner director Simcha Jacobovici and his executive producer, Oscar-award winning filmmaker James Cameron. It will air on Canada's Vision TV on March 6th and later next month on Discovery US and Britain's Channel 4. A companion book, The Jesus Family Tomb, by Mr. Jacobovici and Dr. Charles Pellegrino, has just been released (Harper Collins).

Mr. Jacobovici and Mr. Cameron are scheduled to hold a press conference Monday morning at the New York Public Library, with the Jesus and Mary Magdelene ossuaries, flown in from Israel, on display.

Meanwhile, security agents have been hired to stand guard outside the Talpiyot apartments beneath which the tomb lies, covered by a large cement plate.

"I don't think this changes the fundamentals of faith," Mr. Cameron said in an interview this week. "But the evidence is pretty darn compelling and it definitely bears further study."

Not everyone agrees. "It's a beautiful story, but without any proof whatsoever," archaeologist Dr. Amos Kloner, who wrote the original report on the Talpiyot cave findings, told an Israeli reporter last week. "The names...found on the tombs are names that are similar to the names of the family of Jesus. But those were the most common names found among Jews in the first centuries BCE and CE."

Yet if the individual names were common, the film and book ask: what is the likelihood that this particular group of names, so resonant of the Jesus story, would appear together, contained in the same family tomb?

"There are really only two possibilities," says director Jacobovici. "Either this cluster of names represents the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family. Or some other family, with this very same constellation of names, existed at precisely the same time in history in Jerusalem."

To calculate the odds, Mr. Jacobovici took the data to University of Toronto mathematician Dr. Andrey Feuerverger. Factoring in the commonality of these names in first-Century Israel, Dr. Feuerverger puts the odds of this tomb not belonging to Jesus and his family at one in 600.

Another estimate, commissioned by Dr. James Tabor, chair of the department of religion studies at the University of North Carolina, puts the odds at one in 42 million. "If you took the entire population of Jerusalem at the time," says Dr. Taber, "and put it in a stadium, and asked everyone named Jesus to stand up, you'd have about 2,700 men. Then you'd ask only those with a father named Joseph and a mother named Mary to remain standing. And then those with a brother named Yose and a brother named James. Statistically, you end up with one person."

The James reference is significant because of the 10 ossuaries found at Talpiyot, one later disappeared. Many experts believe that coffin is the now infamous 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' ossuary that turned up a few years ago and was put on public display at the Royal Ontario Museum.

Although many scholars have called the inscription 'brother of Jesus' a modern-day forgery, at least as many academics continue to believe in its authenticity.

Moreover, tests conducted for The Lost Tomb of Jesus show that the patina encrusted on the James ossuary bears precisely the same chemical thumbprint as the other ossuaries found at Talpiyot.

Neither the provenance nor the age of the ossuaries is not in dispute. The boxes, never out of the control of professional archaeologists, are effectively self-dating, since the practice of re-interring the bones of the dead in limestone boxes a year after death was conducted by Jews in the Holy Land for a period of only 100 years. Prominent families stored the boxes in family tombs.

Moreover, all the inscriptions have been corroborated by some of the world's leading epigraphers, including Harvard's Frank Moore Cross.

The 'Jesus, son of Joseph' marking is considered rare; of thousands of inscriptions so far catalogued, only one other bone coffin contained the same construction.

No Christian tradition suggests that Jesus had a son, but the Gospel of John does refer to "the beloved disciple" who rests on Jesus' lap at the last supper.

And perhaps, says Mr. Jacobovici, "although this is pure speculation, when Jesus on the cross says 'mother, behold thy son,' he's not referring to himself or to his mother, but to his son, who is there with Mary Magdalene".

The book of Mark, he adds, also contains a passage that might allude to a son — a reference to a young man, wearing nothing but linen who follows Jesus after his arrest and, when guards try to apprehend him, slips out of his clothes and escapes naked.

"That's a very odd story," says Mr. Jacobovici. "There's no name is given for the young lad, but the gospel writer obviously thought it was important to tell it."

"None of us," maintains Dr. Tabor, "are gleefully presenting this as though we've trumped Christianity. If anything, it might help clarify and refine it a bit. Some people will immediately say this is sensationalism. I don't agree with that. I know enough about it to say this is a subject that deserves serious and continued investigation."

Indeed, it's likely that there will be sequel to The Lost Tomb of Jesus. While searching for the original Talpiyot cave, the filmmakers stumbled upon a second crypt, only 20 meters away that has never been explored by archaeologists. A miniature camera inserted into the tomb revealed three ossuaries.

I call bullshit.

However, if real, it kind of disproves that whole resurrection thing...

I forgot the link: http://tinyurl.com/2hp3k5

I think, if real, it can be used to disprove the virgin birth, the ascension to heaven and, arguably, the resurrection. However, it comes off as bullshit.

Lets put it this way: I will bet my soul its bs. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Hare_Geist:

I forgot the link: http://tinyurl.com/2hp3k5

I think, if real, it can be used to disprove the virgin birth, the ascension to heaven and, arguably, the resurrection. However, it comes off as bullshit.

James Cameron denies that his findings affects the ascension or the resurrection, because:

Even if Jesus’ body was moved from one tomb to another, however, that does not mean that he could not have been resurrected from the second tomb. Belief in the resurrection is based not on which tomb he was buried in, but on alleged sightings of Jesus that occurred after his burial and documented in the Gospels.

and:

It is also a matter of Christian faith that after his resurrection, Jesus ascended to heaven. Some Christians believe that this was a spiritual ascension, i.e., his mortal remains were left behind. Other Christians believe that he ascended with his body to heaven. If Jesus’ mortal remains have been found, this would contradict the idea of a physical ascension but not the idea of a spiritual ascension. The latter is consistent with Christian theology.

From the link in Faiip's thread: http://www.rushprnews.com/press/archives/12391

Man alive! This is all over the internet news sites. Spreading like a virus.

The James Ossuary (brother of Jesus) was said to be a fake. I guess because it provided some "proof" of a historical Jesus. Now these "ossuary'" are to be taken as authentic because they somehow "prove" Jesus to have really died and not resurrected... oh what a tangled web we weave.

What part of "myth" do the Christians not comprehend?

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

What part of "myth" do the Christians not comprehend?

The part that starts with Genesis and ends at Revelations.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

Lets put it this way: I will bet my soul its bs. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

Agreed. How can you find the grave of someone who never existed in the first place?

ZING! http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Agreed. How can you find the grave of someone who never existed in the first place?

ZING! http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Agreed. How can you find the grave of someone who never existed in the first place?

ZING! http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

I do think Jesus is based on somebody who actually existed. However, I don't believe he was the son of God or anything divine, just an important/ instrumental person at the time.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

Lets put it this way: I will bet my soul its bs. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

Are you saying something here has been fabricated?

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Agreed. How can you find the grave of someone who never existed in the first place?

ZING! http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

It's one thing to not believe that Jesus was the son of god. But to believe he didn't exist... that's pushing it.

There are far fewer primary documents saying that Julius Caesar ever lived, but there are thousands documenting the life of Jesus. So I have absolutely no doubt that he ever existed... but I don't believe he was the son of god.

quote:Originally posted by firekitty751:

It's one thing to not believe that Jesus was the son of god. But to believe he didn't exist... that's pushing it.

It's one thing to not believe that Heracles was the son of Zeus. But to believe he didn't exist...that's pushing it. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:There are far fewer primary documents saying that Julius Caesar ever lived, but there are thousands documenting the life of Jesus. So I have absolutely no doubt that he ever existed... but I don't believe he was the son of god.

Unfortunately, there are documents speaking of Caesar's existence that were written during his lifetime. Heck, he even left writings that he wrote himself! Unfortunately for Jesus, all the documents speaking of his existence weren't written until decades after his supposed death. He never left any writings of his own, and there are no writings made by eyewitnesses during his lifetime. Furthermore, all the details of the story of his life: the virgin birth, his teenage years being completely omitted from all the stories, miracles, death, rising from the dead after 3 days...they're all parallel to stories told of other pagan god-men like Dionysus, Mithra, and Osiris. Surely you don't believe they all existed too, do you?

You oughta know better, firekitty... http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)



[This message has been edited by Elephantitis Man (edited 02-28-2007).]

I said I don't believe he's the son of god. Virgin birth, turning water into wine, and all that other bullshit goes along with it. I don't worship him or anything, I just believe he was a real person. Regardless of when they were written, you can't compare it to Zeus and Heracles.

quote:Originally posted by firekitty751:

It's one thing to not believe that Jesus was the son of god. But to believe he didn't exist... that's pushing it.

There are far fewer primary documents saying that Julius Caesar ever lived, but there are thousands documenting the life of Jesus. So I have absolutely no doubt that he ever existed... but I don't believe he was the son of god.

It's just ironic that most of the people who disapprove of Christianity also make the argument that he (Jesus) did not exist. That they (filmmakers) would then in turn go to these lengths is funny to me...

quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:

Are you saying something here has been fabricated?

Since he has not seen the documentary or reviewed the evidence in it's entirety, I believe he's just calling BS prematurely (as most Christians do when anything is presented to them that might POSSIBLY conflict with their faith).

http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Jove:

It's just ironic that most of the people who disapprove of Christianity also make the argument that he (Jesus) did not exist. That they (filmmakers) would then in turn go to these lengths is funny to me...

For the love of MARY ... where does it say that either Cameron, the archeologists OR the producers of the documentary ever claimed that Jesus didn't exist?!?

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:

For the love of MARY ... where does it say that either Cameron, the archeologists OR the producers of the documentary ever claimed that Jesus didn't exist?!?

Nowhere... just a edumacated guess.

quote:Originally posted by Jove:

Nowhere... just a edumacated guess.

Seeing as how they believe that they found the CORPSE of Jesus I am pretty damn sure they believe he existed. Now, perhaps they don't believe in the resurrection but that is an separate argument (and a superfluous one at that).

It is pretty much proven that Jesus the Philosopher was real, the only debate is the son of God thing.

Anyone who doesn't believe that needs to read more. Kind of like, Santa Claus was a real guy, but not this magical guy who brings President.

I personally believe in Christianity.

I think that Jesus existed, and I see no real reason to doubt that the bones in possession of Cameron are Jesus' remains. The statistical evidence alone presented in the documentary is enough the make a really good case.

I'm excited to watch the entirety of the documentary this Sunday.

So who watched it? I thought it was an interesting piece, even as a "docu-drama" ... and yes, they went over the top with some of the re-enactments, almost to the point of overkill.

What disgusted me was the commentary afterwards - the "critical analysis" hosted by old antiquated Ted Koppel himself, with Jacobovici and Dr. Tabor on one side and two *experts* on the other. (Did anyone see this?!)

Within the first five minutes, it was apparent that Teddy Boy had already made up his mind that he was NOT going to stand for having his Saviour be the subject of such "archeo-porn" (his words) - and I thought the entire discussion was harshly unbalanced. Koppel was rude, assuming, and abrupt with his questioning. He interrupted, condenscended and basically maneuvered the entire discussion, trying to get Jacobovici to admit to misquoting the forensic scientists that viewed the ossuaries. Jacobovici promptly whips out an e-mail from the forensic scientist sent AFTER talking with Ted Koppel, which sounded a bit apologetic to Jacobovici for having sorta-kinda-but-not-really recanting his findings. The scientist and theologian on the opposing side seemed quite dissheveled and dismissed pretty much everything Jacobovici stated, including the part where he agreed that he, too, felt further forensic testing needed to be done in order to be 100% sure it was in fact the family of Christ's tomb that had been found.

To me, the most compelling testimony was from the mathematician in the show, who reiterated more than once that the PROBABILITY of finding a tomb with Jesus, son of Joseph, Maria (Virgin Mary), wife of Joseph and the other Mary (reportedly Magdalene) was just beyond coincidental. I don't remember the exact numbers he used, but it was jaw-dropping, at best.

I'm sure they expected a public lashing, but the interview with Ted Koppel was a complete joke. One should usually have to wonder what side the interviewer takes in debate themes, but with Koppel - it was quite obvious from the get-go.

I hope his peers in journalism gives Koppel a good backhand for this. Bill kill-em-all- O'Reilly could have done more fair and balanced reporting than this cretin.

I cant see the odds of those occuring to be too far beyond anything I would witness if I looked up census reports.

The names of all of those are common names for that time in history in Israel. Jesus (or rather, Joshua in Hebrew), Judah, and Joseph were Jewish heros. Two being the grandchildren of Abraham and the other the greatest military commander in their history. (They still teach Joshua's tactics in American military academies).

A question I do have though, were the number of skeletons correct? http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

quote:A question I do have though, were the number of skeletons correct?

You don't actually believe that if he went to heaven, it was his full body, do you? O.o

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

I cant see the odds of those occuring to be too far beyond anything I would witness if I looked up census reports.

The names of all of those are common names for that time in history in Israel. Jesus (or rather, Joshua in Hebrew), Judah, and Joseph were Jewish heros. Two being the grandchildren of Abraham and the other the greatest military commander in their history. (They still teach Joshua's tactics in American military academies).

A question I do have though, were the number of skeletons correct? http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

That staticians apparently based their analysis on stats (in other words they did the claculations).

quote:It is pretty much proven that Jesus the Philosopher was real, the only debate is the son of God thing.

No, it's not. Unless these tombs turn out to be his.

If I remember correctly, Jews buried all five skeletons.

[This message has been edited by Hare_Geist (edited 03-05-2007).]

Argon, I would have bet my left tit that you'd be the first to respond here. And a safe bet that would have been! http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

Did you even watch the program?

Granted, those are common names. And that was one of the first things addressed by the documentary. But take this into consideration:

The odds of finding a tomb with the name Jesus, son of Joseph, isn't that spectactular. The odds of them finding a tomb with the name Jesus, son of Joseph and Maria, wife of Joseph, and Yose, andMariamne (Mary of Magdalene ...wife of Jesus?), and Judah (son of Mariamne, possibly son of Jesus) ... and so on and so forth -

quote:Taken together that these names were found clustered together in a family tomb, the statistical study concluded that the odds, on a most conservative basis - is 600-1 IN FAVOR OF this being the family tomb of Jesus.

How this statistical number was formulated: http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/explore/explore.html



A question I do have though, were the number of skeletons correct?

Read the transcripts if you missed the broadcast. Or don't - you'd just dismiss it anyway if it was contradictory to what your ingrained beliefs were. http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

On the Patina analysis and the James Ossuary:

quote: The crime lab scientists found that the signature of the James ossuary sample matched samples taken from the ossuaries in the Talpiot tomb. Just as important, the James ossuary sample did not match any of an assortment of random samples from other archaeological finds. That result strengthens the case that the James ossuary is the missing 10th ossuary from Talpiot. In turn, when the James inscription is included in the mix of names found on the ossuaries in the tomb, the probability that the tomb blonged to the Jesus' family tomb increases to 30,000-to-1.



Edit: Uploaded the documents:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2dyaom

http://preview.tinyurl.com/292xqy

http://preview.tinyurl.com/23ovgs

http://preview.tinyurl.com/24qjun

[This message has been edited by AngryFemme (edited 03-05-2007).]

That's the problem AngryFemme, the James Ossuary is the most sketchy one of all. I didn't watch the show, so I don't know if they dealt with this or not so, but they took soil found on the James Ossuary and it did not match the soil found on the rest. We would expect them all to have common soil if they all came from the same place. Moreover, the signatures they are analyzing are suprisingly easy to fake. They are simply determining whether the signatures match the form of writing of that time. Which could be faked quite easily with knowledge of the language.

If we don't include the James Ossuary, then the odds are 1 in 600 if I'm not mistaken; not out of the ordinary.

Are you a fan of podcasts, AngryFemme? I suggest you listen to the one at http://theskepticsguide.org/ they speak with an anthropologist about this issue.

Thanks, Rust -

I'd love to listen to it, but I'm at home sick with the flu. I don't have working speakers on my comp at home - but I'm all over it as soon as I return to the office, hopefully Tues or Weds, flu-bug be damned.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

I didn't watch the show, so I don't know if they dealt with this or not so, but they took soil found on the James Ossuary and it did not match the soil found on the rest.

This is really all they touched on concerning the James ossuary during that broadcast:

Robert Genna, director of the Suffolk County Crime Laboratory in New York, analyzed both the patina taken from the Talpiot Tomb and chemical residue obtained from the "James" ossuary, which was also found around 1980, but subsequently disappeared and resurfaced in the antiquities market. Although controversy surrounds this burial box, Genna found that the two patinas matched.

"The samples were consistent with each other,"

...which I realize still leaves alot of room for investigation. I suspect this will be an ongoing debate for awhile.

Just FYI.

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:



...which I realize still leaves alot of room for investigation. I suspect this will be an ongoing debate for awhile.



Indeed, the James Ossuary is the most contested part of the whole claim, yet also the most important I think. It's what makes the statistical analysis fluctuate from not that unlikely (1 in 600) and pretty fucking unlikely (1 in 30, 000).

Here's a report by Prof. Yuval Goren. Department of Archaeology and Ancient Eastern Cultures and the Laboratory for Comparative Microarchaeology, Tel Aviv University:



"Conclusions

A. The ossuary is authentic, based on its typology and patination. The accumulation of rock varnish is considered a very lengthy process. It appears that the deposition of the patina was also considerably prolonged.

B. The inscription was engraved (or at least, completely cleaned) in modern times.

C. The inscription coating is not natural. It was made by grinding and dissolving chalk in hot water (possibly the powder resulting from the newly carved inscription), and spilling the paste onto the inscription and surrounding area, in order to blur the freshly engraved signs."

-- http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Goren_report.htm

Rust, do you believe the alleged "Lost Tomb of Jesus' Family" to be a complete fake?

And what about the implications of Mary Magdalene being the wife of Jesus, and possibly the mother of Jesus' offspring?

Edit: Also, does the James Ossuary completely undermine the findings at the Talpiot tomb?



[This message has been edited by AngryFemme (edited 03-05-2007).]

Can't they just compare the DNA with the blood taken from the shroud of turin? It wouldn't disprove anything if there wasn't a match, but that would seal the deal if they matched.

The names that were found look more like scratchings, and if they are names you have other more obvious names before you get to names like Jesus.

honestly, i feel that all that believing all that stuff about jesus is like believing in santa. Its one thing to respect him as a prophet and what not but there comes a point when one must separate the fact from what is added to mystify people.

[This message has been edited by gunjah (edited 03-05-2007).]

If you listened to Larz Larsson(I dont know how to spell his name but he has a radio show)i dont listen to him but there was nothing on tv so i turned on the radio and he was on. he had 2 archeologist or something like that and they said that this tomb is not new they found it about 1988 or close to that and said no one there at the convention where they showed this information was excited because the "evidence" was severely underwhelming and the 2 people they had on both agreed that they did not believe it was his familys tomb.

BTW these guys had no reason to be bias.

quote:Originally posted by SAMMY249:

BTW these guys had no reason to be bias.

...because real science is nothing more than democracy.

quote:Originally posted by OdayJuarez:

Can't they just compare the DNA with the blood taken from the shroud of turin? It wouldn't disprove anything if there wasn't a match, but that would seal the deal if they matched.

What are you going to test? Its not like he bled or jerked off on it or anything.

The only reason I said that is because some people might come here and say they were rounded up because they were the only 2 who thought that way.

And what difference did it make?...

Besides, Lars Larson is a crazy guy. He threatened his daughter by saying he would shoot her if she smokes pot. Thats some crazy shit.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

And what difference did it make?...

Besides, Lars Larson is a crazy guy. He threatened his daughter by saying he would shoot her if she smokes pot. Thats some crazy shit.

Larz Larson is very crazy.

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:

Rust, do you believe the alleged "Lost Tomb of Jesus' Family" to be a complete fake?

I don't have enough evidence to conclude either way. My impression, however, is that there is certainly evidence that puts their claims in question. That's not to say that they are deliberately faking this, but that maybe they've mistakenly labeled this as their tomb, when it was just the tomb of a different set of people.



quote:And what about the implications of Mary Magdalene being the wife of Jesus, and possibly the mother of Jesus' offspring?

I don't see much implications to begin with. If it is true that they married and had offspring then that might put into question some Christian accounts, but we both know they will rationalize that before the final verdict ever comes close to being reached.

quote:

Edit: Also, does the James Ossuary completely undermine the findings at the Talpiot tomb?

Maybe not completely, but substantially. It's what makes the difference between a 1 in 600 chance, and a 1 in 30,000 chance (if we believe the claims of the statisticians and the assumptions they are making). A substantial difference to say the least.

I watched a news report on this, and experts on the same news report stated that the marks on the ossuary supposedly containing Our Lord's remains were not made with the same tools as any ohter markings found in the tomb. Hoax.

Well, fuck me -

Let this be a lesson that if you look hard enough at what you want to find, that your eyes will trick you into seeing it.

...But I stand by my statement that Ted Koppel is a chump...

http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

I thought it was very interesting.

They did bring up the point that it wouldn't be THAT unlikely to find Jesus' remains, as they found the guy that had him crucified.

They obviously can't really prove it, but I'd be really excited if it turned out to be the real deal.

quote:Originally posted by firekitty751:

They did bring up the point that it wouldn't be THAT unlikely to find Jesus' remains, as they found the guy that had him crucified.

Uh... how did they know the corpse was the corpse of the guy who crucified Jesus? I've not heard of this.

quote:Originally posted by OdayJuarez:

Can't they just compare the DNA with the blood taken from the shroud of turin? It wouldn't disprove anything if there wasn't a match, but that would seal the deal if they matched.

If there was actually anything to sample on Shroud of Turin and they didn't match it would mean little as the authentic of Shroud is under question itself.

I probably wouldn't bother to test. What's the likelihood of two objects with such dubious authenticity matching up?



[This message has been edited by flatplat (edited 03-06-2007).]

Hi all,

In reguards to the James Ossuary:

quote:There are further problems as well in connection with the James ossuary. The claim is made in the debate follow up show that Oded Golan said that somewhere around 1980 he bought the James ossuary. This is false. Golan has consistently maintained that he bought this ossuary before the Israeli law changed in 1978. In fact he claims to have bought it in the mid-70s and at the trial that continues in Jerusalem a 1970s era picture of him with the inscribed James ossuary was produced. The reason that the date is important is because after 1978 all such important artifacts found in Israel belong to the state of Israel. They cannot belong to a private collector like Oded Golan. For the reader wanting to see proof positive of this, see p. 84 of the Brother of Jesus book. The other reason that is important is it means the James ossuary could not possibly have come from the Talpiot tomb at all since it was not opened until 1980. The next feeble attempt to save the show's theory will perhaps be to claim there were other ossuaries in the Talpiot tomb that went missing from some break in. Not no. 10, but rather no 11 perhaps? Of course this will be a complete argument from silence. We do not know there were more than 10 ossuaries in that tomb ever.

I havent checked on this claim.

The quote was from: http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/

God Bless,

johnny

Update:

"SUMMARY POINTS OF DISCUSSION:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI>The original transcription of the inscription was incorrect.

<LI>The inscription does not read “Mariamene the Master”nor does the name Mariamene or Mariamne appear on the ossuary at all.

<LI>The inscription reflects the writing of two distinct scribes who wrote in different forms of the Greek script.

<LI>The correct reading of the inscription is “Mariame and Mara,” based on parallels from contemporary inscriptions and documents.

<LI>The ossuary thus contained the bones of at least two different women, interred at two separate times, one named Mariame and the other Mara.

<LI>No support exists for ascribing the ossuary to Mary Magdalene."

</UL>

-- http://www.uhl.ac/MariameAndMartha/

[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 03-19-2007).]

Ooo! Ooo!

Tabor and Cameron are gonna get MUCHO flack over this, especially on bullet point #5.

so have we all agreed?

Hoax or not?

More like an oversensationalized, dramatized for television, mountain-out-of-a-molehill kinda scenario, Blade.

http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

I find it very depressing that we even have to doubt our fellow humans of such a forgery

How can you decide if it's legit if you have no way of knowing if one side is lying or not? The term 'expert' is dubious at best, I've seen them call a history teacher an "expert" of paleontology on the news. What am I supposed to believe?

Best part is, most of the religious folk are far from the benevolence their own religion tries to teach them. Most of them don't even realize how they twist it to their own agenda to give them more power at the cost of others. Sigh

To Rust about the stated odds:

What it meant by 1 in 600 is that the odds of it not being the tomb of the Jesus of the Bible is 1 in 600, not that the combination of names happens 1 out of every 600 tombs.

However, I would have to agree with Dr. Pfann's blog that the statistics seem to be rather fishy. It reminded me of those statistics that creationists come up with for the odds that life could have formed from a lifeless planet.

I came across the subject again while looking at religioustolerance.org... it gave a view in favor of the idea that it was the tomb of Christianity's Jesus. It sounded pretty convincing from what it said, even though when I first heard about it around a month ago it sounded sensationalist (the director of the Titanic having the body of Jesus), and once again a parallel to something I'd seen before rose in my mind -- those charlatans who sold pig bones and pieces of broken wood as holy relics to the ignorant people of the Middle Ages. The eunuch in the Canterbury Tales.

It looks like yet another false alarm. The conspiracy theorist within me is disappointed.

The links:

ReligiousTolerance.org pages on the fiasco (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chrjebody.htm)

Dr. Pfann's Blog (http://www.uhl.ac/blog/)

[This message has been edited by Clarphimous (edited 04-03-2007).]

quote:Originally posted by Hare_Geist:

I forgot the link: http://tinyurl.com/2hp3k5

I think, if real, it can be used to disprove the virgin birth, the ascension to heaven and, arguably, the resurrection. However, it comes off as bullshit.

finnaly you people come to your senses and realize something!

BY THE POWER VESTED IN ME, I HERE BY DUB THIS SITE AND INFORMATION CONSPIRACY!!!

quote:Originally posted by Clarphimous:

To Rust about the stated odds:

What it meant by 1 in 600 is that the odds of it not being the tomb of the Jesus of the Bible is 1 in 600, not that the combination of names happens 1 out of every 600 tombs.



"Andrey Feuerverger, a mathematics professor at the University of Toronto, calculates that the odds that all six names would appear together in one tomb are 1 in 600, calculated conservatively — or possibly even as much as one in one million.

Mr. Feuerverger explains his method while standing against a chalkboard covered in equations, but an easier explanation is an analogy to the Beatles, included in the Discovery Channel press kit. Future archaeologists who may find a tomb in Liverpool with the names John, Paul and George may consider the names too common to draw conclusions. But if the name Richard Starkey, the real name of Ringo, is also there, then bells will ring. (That example was presumably left out of the film for fear of appearing impious; John Lennon got into huge trouble in 1966 by saying that the Beatles were “more popular than Jesus.”)"



-- http://tinyurl.com/2jsevm



In fact, if you look at how exactly the statistician arrived at the figure, you'll further confirm what I said was correct:

http://ntgateway.com/weblog/D'Mello2.pdf

You'll see that he specifically centers his calculations on the frequency of the names. How many times 'Jesus Son of Joseph' appears, how many times, how many times 'Mariamne' appears, et cetera, and then based on that the odds that all the names would appear in the same tomb.

Also notice his conversation with another statistician on how his figures have been misinterpreted by Discovery and the public.

[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 04-03-2007).]

I see. My mistake.