Jesus' bones 'raised'

An Israeli blogger, Israelitybites, is reporting an extraordinary find, a burial casket purportedly containing the bones of Jesus. Thank you Emmanuel for pointing me towards this.

Izzy Bee writes: 'Digging for controversy, the Titanic filmmaker James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici are about to stun Christians the world over with a docu-drama that claims archaeologists have located the casket of Jesus.  The inscribed box, with some human remains still inside, apparently was crammed into an old cave near Talpiyot, an industrial zone in Jerusalem, alongside nine other two thousand year-old sarcophagi allegedly containing the bodies of Mother Mary, the carpenter Joseph, a little-known brother called Jofah, Mary Magdalene, and, most surprisingly of all, Jesus's son Judah, who technically could be considered the grandson of God.
To read more, click here.'

Bee says, rightly, that it sounds like a Da Vinci Code sequel.

Bee, who describes him (her?) self as a cyperpundit and office wag and is a relatively newcomer to the Holy Land, continues: 'A couple of these mysterious bone boxes are about to be unveiled in New York City, in good time to promote Cameron's latest made-for-television movie, which will be broadcast on Discovery Channel in the US, Channel 8 in Israel, and Channel 4 in Britain before Easter.'

Devout Christians, he says, will abhor Cameron's publicity stunt, considering it as absolute heresy.

Bee continues: 'Some 27 years after archaeologists first uncovered this unprepossessing family tomb containing half a dozen inscribed caskets and four unmarked ones, the sensational scientific claims now threaten to debunk belief in the Resurrection, a cornerstone of the Christian faith. The New Testament recounts how three days after crucifixion, Jesus arose from the grave (which is now supposedly the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at the heart of Jerusalem's old walled city.) But scientists, archaeologists, DNA experts, statisticians,and antiquities specialists are suggesting that Jesus's burial site was on a hill rather far away from the old rugged cross.

'Repercussions of the initial discovery were minimized, even after Israeli professor Amos Kloner deciphered the inscriptions containing such profoundly familiar Biblical names a decade ago, because the Israeli Antiquities Authority stored the caskets in their Beit Shemesh archive. Little publicity leaked out. Biblical archaeology has proven to be a minefield, albeit with a certain sects' appeal. Who could have foreseen that forensic tests could be made on Jesus' bones in a New York crime lab? If you thought that the Israeli archaeologists' salvage tunnel close to the Al Aqsa mosque ignited some religious fury, get ready for another white hot fight.

Bee has also posted the inscription that started all the speculation, from the webpage of Simcha Jacobovici, aka the 'Naked Archaeologist'

Thank you Izzy Bee for this stimulating post.

Comments

[Hans]

In this page William Sulik wrote posted 26 Feb 2007 as follows: THIS REMINDS ME OF AN OLD JOKE.It seems that back in the 1950s a team of Roman Catholic archaeologist conducting a dig in Jerusalem stumbled on the bones of Jesus and became convinced that indeed these were the bones of Jesus. Obviously, this was for them a horryfying discovery......
I`ve be very interesting to know if the story is true and what does W. Sulik know about this or it`s only a joke.

[simon]

Appel:"On the other side of the argument is the fact of all the names found in the Christian Bible shown side by side in the tombs."

There is no "other side" to the argument - it's just nonsense!

Read here under "Statistics" and "The Names"

(Joe Zias was the curator for anthropology and archeology at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem from 1972 to 1997 and personally numbered the ossuaries involved)

The conclusion is also worth being read by people who keep taking all this Dan Brown type over hyped junk seriously;

CONCLUSION- All of this can be neatly summed up in the following opinion piece (edited) by a SC biblical scholar (Byron. McCane) who wrote in today’s paper, what I believe pretty much speaks for all of us involved, enraged and fed up with the current wave of pseudo science posing as biblical scholarship, foisted upon the public, by our colleagues.

"The publicity for the Discovery Channel documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” has a disturbingly familiar ring. First came the James Ossuary; then The DaVinci Code, next the John the Baptist cave, and now “the lost tomb of Jesus. The two archaeologists involved in “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” for example, already have a well-known track record for sensationalism. These programs go for the quick buck. Everything is crafted to generate interest, to make sales. The disturbing trend in recent documentaries toward profit-driven sensationalism, however, is an insult to all concerned, and especially to those of us who are scholars of these subjects. And that is why it is scholars who should bring this train of sensationalism to a stop."

[Emanuel Appel]

a letter from America

Dear Gabe,

On the other side of the argument is the fact of all the names found in the Christian Bible shown side by side in the tombs.

If the story of the Resurrection is a fable, does that invalidate your religion? What religion would you turn to then, the God of Israel, Mohammed, your own native religion?

[gabe]

Witherington and other leading biblical scholars and archeologists say there are at least 10 reasons why the "Jesus Tomb" claim is completely bogus:

There is no DNA evidence that this is the historical Jesus of Nazareth

The statistical analysis is untrustworthy

The name "Jesus" was a popular name in the first century, appearing in 98 other tombs and on 21 other ossuaries

There is no historical evidence that Jesus was ever married or had a child

The earliest followers of Jesus never called him "Jesus, son of Joseph"

It is highly unlikely that Joseph, who died earlier in Galilee, was buried in Jerusalem, since the historical record connects him only to Nazareth or Bethlehem

The Talipot tomb and ossuaries are such that they would have belonged to a rich family, which does not match the historical record for Jesus

Fourth-century church historian Eusebius makes quite clear that the body of James, the brother of Jesus, was buried alone near the temple mount and that his tomb was visited in the early centuries, making very unlikely that the Talipot tomb was Jesus' "family tomb"

The two Mary ossuaries do not mention anyone from Migdal, but simply has the name Mary, one of the most common of all ancient Jewish female names

By all ancient accounts, the tomb of Jesus was empty, making it highly unlikely that it was moved to another tomb, decayed for one year's time, and then the bones put in an ossuary

"In light of all the incredible number of problems with the recent claim that Jesus' grave has been found, the time-honored, multi-faceted evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus is more convincing than ever," said Dr. Gary Habermas, an expert on the resurrection of Jesus and author of The Case for the Resurrection. "Even the early opponents of the Christian message acknowledged that Jesus' tomb was empty. And the evidence for Jesus' bodily resurrection appearances has never been refuted

http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007/02/jesus-tomb-titanic-talpiot-tomb-theory.html

[Les Westley]

It's been interesting to note that there has actually been debate on whether or not the bones found were those of Jesus. The name Jesus was also a name taken by Jews. If Christians really and truly believe that Jesus rose from the dead and accended into heaven - end of debate?

If He didn't do either of these then our faith would be in vain and there would be no salvation from sin and no hope of eternal life - end of church?

Fortunately, adherance to Christianity is a faith thing (which pleases God more than anything else). I have the faith and the knowledge that there is more evidence to support the scriptures than there is against it.
Trust me - they are NOT the bones of Jesus, the Son of God.

[Emanuel Appel]

a letter from America

Dear Ruth,

There are some whose whole lives revolve around a concept of crucifixion and other worldly ascent to heaven on the part of a Jew born in the first century of the common era. This is a harmless belief in itself.

The mischief comes from the marriage of such views with the elevation of a priest to near Imperial powers for the last 2000 years. Said priest used the powers of the state and his own to persecute and burn alive those who disagreed with the official credo and to denigrate and humiliate Israel as much as possible. It's a despicable creed and organization worthy of being an ally of Islam today.

The fact is that Yeshua ( Jesus ) was a Jew who liked to preach. He was used by the enemies of Israel to beat her with. The Devil could not have formulated a better scenario.

[simon]

Yes publicity as people jump on the Dan Brown gravy train of nonsense.

For anyone interested these excepts are from the original 1996 report - "A Tomb with Incised Ossuaries in East Talpiyot, Jerusalem" by Amos Kloner ('Atiqot, 1996, 29: 15-22). This was based on the original excavation done by the late Yosef Gat (Joseph Gath) between March 28 and April 14, 1980. The ossuary inscriptions were initially published two years previously in Rahmani's A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries (1994).

[...] The ossuaries found in the burial cave, previously published by Rahmani (1994: Nos. 701-709), are typical Jewish ossuaries of the first century CE [...]. Six ossuaries are inscribed (60%), which is a higher ratio than normally found. Five ossuaries are inscribed in Hebrew and only one in Greek; normally the proportion of Hebrew to Greek is 4:3 [...].

Notes on the first inscribed ossuary:

[...] On the long back side [of the ossuary], in the top center, is an inscription in Greek: [...] (of Mariamene, [also called] Mara) [...].

The name Mariamene, a variant of the name [...] (Miriam, Maryam) and [...] (Marya), is inscribed on more than twenty ossuaries in the Israel State Collections [...]. [Miriam, Maryam] and [Marya] are the most common feminine names of the Second Temple period (Hachlili 1984:189). Mara, a contraction of Martha, is used here as a second name. This name too is common in the Jewish feminine onomasticon.

Notes on the second inscribed ossuary:

[...] On the left upper side [...] is a well executed Hebrew inscription [...]: (Yehuda son of Yeshua).

The name Yehuda (Judas) is the third most popular name in the Jewish onomasticon of the Hellenistic and Roman periods. In a study of 1,986 names of the Hellenistic and Roman period, conducted by T. Ilan, 128 persons were found to bear this name [...].

The name [...] (Yeshua = Jesus), a derivative of Yehoshua (Joshua), has been found on five ossuaries in the Israel State Collections [...]. Yesoshua/Yeshua is the sixth most common male name used during the Hellenistic and Roman periods in Eretz Israel, borne by 71 of the individuals studies by Ilan.

Notes on the third inscribed ossuary:

On the narrow side [...] is an inscription in large letters: [...] (Matya). Scratched inside the ossuary was the name [...] (Mat(y)a) [...]. Both are shortened forms of [...] (Matityahu = Matthew). Ilan (1987) identified 46 Jewish males with this name.

Notes on the fourth inscribed ossuary:

On the name side [...] the name [...] (Yeshua (?) son of Yehosef) is inscribed. It is preceded by an X - the mark of either the mason or the bone-collector [...]. The first name following the X mark is difficult to read. In contrast to other ossuaries in this tomb, the incisions are here superficial and cursorily carved. Each of the four letters suggesting [Yeshua] is unclear, but the reading is corrobroated by the inscription of Ossuary 2 [...].

Notes on the fifth inscribed ossuary:

[...] On the upper half of the front panel the name [...] (Yose) is inscribed. Yose is a contraction of Yehosef (Joseph), the second most common name in the Second Temple period (Ilan 1987:238; see Hachlili 1984:188-190). Some 35% of all known Jewish males of the Hellenistic and Roman periods in Eretz Israel bore 'Hasmonean' names: Matthew (Ossuary 3, above), John, Simon, Judas (Ossuaries 2 and 4, above), Eleazar, and Jonathan. Joseph was the sixth brother in the family (2 Maccabbees 8:22), and the similar popularity of this name may be explained by this fact (Ilan 1987:240-241).

Notes on the sixth inscribed ossuary:

Centered on the upper half of the front panel, the name [...] (Marya) is inscribed [...].

From the concluding discussion of Kloner's report:

[...] This burial cave was probably used for three or four generations. The finds, which included a small quantity of sherds, allow for a Second Temple period dating, ie., from the end of the first century BCE or the beginning of the first century CE, until approximately 70 CE.

[Ellie in T.O.]

Why is this being presented as news? I remember when those ossuaries first came into the news 10 years ago. Archaeologists dismissed suggestions that this was the Holy Family, and the story fizzled. (Another ossuary, said to be that of James, was recently discovered to be a forgery.)

Now suddenly the "news" is "breaking" all over again -- just in time for Lent, a high-awareness time for religious stories -- with a little help from Cameron's personal coffers. Hmm. I smell Publicity...

[Alice C. Linsley]

Great! Some more relics soon to hit the market.

[Anibal Lesgow]

William, great joke! Regarding Graeme Smith, you can believe it is him or not, but the point of him not naming his son after "the man who would betray him" does not add up: if he did live to have children, he wasn't crucified and thus, was not betrayed! Actually, Judas could have been his Godfather! (just joking).

[Deb]

Yup, shouldnt this be on the Joke page......:)

[William Sulik]

This reminds me of an old joke:

It seems that back in the 1950s a team of Roman Catholic archaeologists conducting a dig in Jerusalem stumbled on the bones of Jesus and became convinced that indeed these were the bones of Jesus. Obviously, this was for them a horrifying discovery.

And so they called up the pope to notify him that the bones of Jesus had been found. And the pope decided that this was a matter of such terrible ecumenical concern that he was going to have to convene an ecumenical council. And he asked his advisers, "Who's the greatest Protestant theologian?" And he was told it was Paul Tillich. (They were wrong about that, of course. But in any case, they were told it was Tillich.)

So the pope called up Tillich on the telephone, explained that the bones of Jesus had been found. There was a long silence on the other end of the line.

And finally Tillich said, “So then, he really did live.”

[Mark Goodacre]

Thanks for the post, Ruth. The claim being made here appears to be the same as that made over a decade ago in the Sunday Times, 31 March 1996. See my NT Gateway Blog today for more. Best wishes, Mark Goodacre

[Huw Raphael]

The Toronto Globe and Mail, reporting this story on Sunday, included discussion from various Biblical scholars about how likely it is to find this particular constellation of names and have it *not* be related to the folks in the Gospel. Of course there is no way to prove any of it. I was amused that the G&M said this find didn't question the Resurrection: only the Ascension and that only if you insisted Jesus ascended bodily and not just spiritually.

[Graeme Smith]

Obviously we have yet to see the film, but just how does someone go about proving that this particular Jesus was the Jesus of the Bible?

Surely all that can truthfully be ascertained is that the Jesus in the grave happened to have family which had the same names. Also why on earth would Jesus name his son after the man who would betray him?

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

Another interesting titbit is that there is no plan to build synagogues around the Kotel (Western Wall of the Temple) area, as falsely reported by various media.

What they are doing is reparation work, which I saw for myself yesterday, as I waited for the Western Wall Foundation Tunnel Tour (more accurately called 'underground open spaces' tour), which takes in the nearest site to the Temple Holy of Holies which it is possible to access without disturbing Muslim holy sites.

It was really astonishing to see stonework dating from about 2000 years ago, which was actually of better quality than the repair work higher up done by the Mamelukes around 1300 (according to the guide).

It appears that modern archeologists, stoneworkers and others haven't a clue how people 2000 years ago had the know-how or expertise to do such an amazing job.

And when we came out into the Via Dolorosa there was a whole bunch of Japanese singing in Hebrew and expressing their great joy at seeing the Kotel for the first time.

This is the relevant website: www.thekotel.org