Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-04-2012, 04:50 PM

Hi Philosopher Jay,

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Any other guesses as to what the image actually is?

Jame's Tabor's triple down may to be claim the image is of a perpendicular fish with a coin in its mouth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mat 17:27

Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

Logically some one's gotta ask where did the fish get the coin?

Obviously the fish had to find a sunken treasure trove and eat a coin therefrom. The image depicts the sacred moment where the perpendicular fish is eating a coin from the ocean floor.

Best wishes

Pete

la70119 · 03-05-2012, 04:15 AM

After seeing the unquentarium and the loutrophoros, I think Jay is 100% correct on what the ossuary design resembles.

Tabor and Jacobovici are BUSTED.

squiz · 03-05-2012, 07:04 AM

What I never understood is why James Tabor is accorded so much respect. I mean even before this Jesus Tomb stuff, his theories came across to me as wild speculation. And yet he gets to write in bibleinterp.com (not sure who controls this), and people like Tom Verenna say "I have nothing but respect for James Tabor; I think that when he is not working with Jacobovici, he is lucid and erudite and an exceptional scholar." (link).

Now I enjoy speculation as much as the next guy, but I don't understand why his Jesus-Dynasty speculation (before the Talbiot tomb) was treated so respectfully, whereas Eisenmann was basically dismissed and Doherty was attacked with a vengeance. Was it because Eisenmann is a terrible communicator and Tabor is a nice guy? Was it because Doherty has no qualifications and Tabor is a professor? Or were his arguments (until now) really that much better.

PhilosopherJay · 03-06-2012, 06:27 AM

Hi All,

Robert Cargrill of the University of Iowa has an amazing blog where he shows how the image on the ossuary was "photoshopped" (manipulated) to look like a fish.

He points out how important orientation can be in how we interpret a picture:

The image Tabor gave to the press and reprinted in major newspapers was reorientated from its horizontal position by 90 degrees to make it look more like a fish swimming sideways:

Besides this manipulation of the orientation, he notes how Tabor's original ossuary image was manipulated to make it look more fishlike (20 on the left is the original image and 21 on the right is the manipulated image):

Note the shaping of the tail to make it look more like a fish's fin and that the three decoration bands or "segs" have become four in the retouched photograph.

This is his conclusion:

Quote:

Unfortunately, the visual evidence detailed above compels us to conclude that Fig. 21 from pg. 42 of Dr. James Tabor’s original Feb 28, 2012 Bible and Interpretation article entitled, “A Preliminary Report of an Exploration of a Sealed 1st Century Tomb in East Talpiot, Jerusalem,” has experienced a high degree of digital manipulation. Given the changes to the “tail fin” of the supposed “fish,” and given the deliberate rotation of the image’s orientation causing it to more resemble the natural orientation of a fish without offering a compass point or any indication on the image whatsoever that the image has been rotated, it can be argued that the motivation behind making these digital alterations to the image was the desire to create, or at least “enhance” the illusion of a “great fish” swimming freely in the ocean, while vomiting forth a human head.

We should not state that the image has been “faked,” as there is obviously an image on the ossuary. However, we are forced to conclude that the image was digitally manipulated and its orientation altered in such a way so as to encourage and enhance its interpretation as a fish over other possible interpretations. The fact that Dr. Tabor is still using the doctored photo as “evidence” upon which to base his recent rebuttals of other scholars’ critiques of his theory on his own jamestabor.com blog and in a new Bible and Interpretation article is quite telling.

What is more troubling is the prospect that other images published by Mr. Jacobovici and Dr. Tabor may be similarly digitally “enhanced” without proper acknowledgment. If such image manipulation is demonstrated in the “Jonah fish” image, which is central to their sensational and already highly spurious claim, how can we be sure that other images, such as those of the inscriptions, have not experienced similar amounts of digital alteration? Let us remember that the image distributed to the press and on the “museum quality replica” are, in fact, artist’s renditions of the image on the ossuary and not the image itself – a rendition that the authors desperately want viewers to interpret as a fish.

With the credibility of the visual evidence demonstrated above now highly suspect, and with the scholarly consensus nearly unanimously interpreting the image as something other than a fish, we should be all the more skeptical of any and all claims made by Mr. Jacobovici and Dr. Tabor regarding any claim of Jonah, a fish, or so-called “new evidence” of early Christianity obtained from these tombs.

Because if it doesn’t look like a fish, and doesn’t swim like a fish, it may very well be an ancient vessel cleverly Photoshopped to look like a fish.

Mark Goodacre notes in another post that Taber may have been predisposed to interpret the image as a fish based on Taber's writings about Jonah in 2007.

Sheshbazzar · 03-06-2012, 11:46 AM

'Dr' James Tabor is going to have a most difficult time explaining where that entire 4th segment next to the 'tail' of his 'fish' came from.

la70119 · 03-06-2012, 12:13 PM

When you team up with Jacobovici, expect your reputation to be DESTROYED.

There is NO REASON for this photoshopping. NONE.

No doubt Simcha Jacobovici, a.k.a. "The Naked Archaeologist," has been exposed as a fraud many times. His latest fiasco was the supposed "crucifixion nails" discovery from the sepulchral complex of Caiaphas the High Priest 18-37 CE.

Even a radical athiest Youtuber by the name Calpurnpiso has exposed him as an idiot. He went down into the Roman catacombs with an Italian expert on catacomb inscriptions and said, that not only did he see evidence of early Christianity in the obvious markings (like fish and anchors) but he could "see them... everywhere!" And for evidence he pointed at a painting of a dolphin holding a trident, saying he saw a sign of the cross and the trinity in it.

manwithdream · 03-06-2012, 01:12 PM

I think that as a fish it has terrible scales. I think as an amphora, it makes more sense, but the top is too wide. Maybe the artist who did this work was really bad and working from memory because bad drawers (like me) draw things terribly wrong from memory and while looking at the object. Can't this just be something done by a horrible artist. THe other ossuaries with amphora on them look beautiful because the artists were really good.

la70119 · 03-06-2012, 11:34 PM

Another thing about this hotchpotch of an amphorae, an unquentarium and an loutrophoros is that when you turn it sideways so that the bottom of the jar, that is, the alleged head of the fish and head of the person being swallowed are at the left, you see a sign of a Latin Cross in the decorations / "scales".

Right now no one is mentioning it as far as I know but when Tabor and Jacobovici present their findings in published electronic and print media ready to be picked apart (I mean who would peer review it? Seriously.), a discussion about the sign of the cross WILL be included. Mark my words.

Vorkosigan · 03-09-2012, 07:05 AM

Wow that's brutal... and sad.

Vorkosigan

PhilosopherJay · 03-09-2012, 08:43 AM

This blog Exploring Our Matrix, gives a list of the most recent blogs on the ossuary. I thought Richard Bauckham's blog suggesting that the word "Zeus" is actually referred to in the inscription was quite interesting. Apparently the inscription found on a different part of the ossuary from the fish/uncertain object is also quite uncertain.

03-09-2012, 08:43 AM	#20
PhilosopherJay Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Orlando Posts: 2,014	Latest Round-Up This blog Exploring Our Matrix, gives a list of the most recent blogs on the ossuary. I thought Richard Bauckham's blog suggesting that the word "Zeus" is actually referred to in the inscription was quite interesting. Apparently the inscription found on a different part of the ossuary from the fish/uncertain object is also quite uncertain.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-05-2012, 04:15 AM	#12
la70119 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: The only Carribean port not in the Tropics. Posts: 359	After seeing the unquentarium and the loutrophoros, I think Jay is 100% correct on what the ossuary design resembles. Tabor and Jacobovici are BUSTED.

03-05-2012, 07:04 AM	#13
squiz Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Munich Germany Posts: 434	What I never understood is why James Tabor is accorded so much respect. I mean even before this Jesus Tomb stuff, his theories came across to me as wild speculation. And yet he gets to write in bibleinterp.com (not sure who controls this), and people like Tom Verenna say "I have nothing but respect for James Tabor; I think that when he is not working with Jacobovici, he is lucid and erudite and an exceptional scholar." (link). Now I enjoy speculation as much as the next guy, but I don't understand why his Jesus-Dynasty speculation (before the Talbiot tomb) was treated so respectfully, whereas Eisenmann was basically dismissed and Doherty was attacked with a vengeance. Was it because Eisenmann is a terrible communicator and Tabor is a nice guy? Was it because Doherty has no qualifications and Tabor is a professor? Or were his arguments (until now) really that much better.

03-06-2012, 11:46 AM	#15
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	'Dr' James Tabor is going to have a most difficult time explaining where that entire 4th segment next to the 'tail' of his 'fish' came from.

03-06-2012, 12:13 PM	#16
la70119 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: The only Carribean port not in the Tropics. Posts: 359	When you team up with Jacobovici, expect your reputation to be DESTROYED. There is NO REASON for this photoshopping. NONE. No doubt Simcha Jacobovici, a.k.a. "The Naked Archaeologist," has been exposed as a fraud many times. His latest fiasco was the supposed "crucifixion nails" discovery from the sepulchral complex of Caiaphas the High Priest 18-37 CE. Even a radical athiest Youtuber by the name Calpurnpiso has exposed him as an idiot. He went down into the Roman catacombs with an Italian expert on catacomb inscriptions and said, that not only did he see evidence of early Christianity in the obvious markings (like fish and anchors) but he could "see them... everywhere!" And for evidence he pointed at a painting of a dolphin holding a trident, saying he saw a sign of the cross and the trinity in it.

03-06-2012, 01:12 PM	#17
manwithdream Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: united states Posts: 156	I think that as a fish it has terrible scales. I think as an amphora, it makes more sense, but the top is too wide. Maybe the artist who did this work was really bad and working from memory because bad drawers (like me) draw things terribly wrong from memory and while looking at the object. Can't this just be something done by a horrible artist. THe other ossuaries with amphora on them look beautiful because the artists were really good.

03-06-2012, 11:34 PM	#18
la70119 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: The only Carribean port not in the Tropics. Posts: 359	Another thing about this hotchpotch of an amphorae, an unquentarium and an loutrophoros is that when you turn it sideways so that the bottom of the jar, that is, the alleged head of the fish and head of the person being swallowed are at the left, you see a sign of a Latin Cross in the decorations / "scales". Right now no one is mentioning it as far as I know but when Tabor and Jacobovici present their findings in published electronic and print media ready to be picked apart (I mean who would peer review it? Seriously.), a discussion about the sign of the cross WILL be included. Mark my words.

03-09-2012, 07:05 AM	#19
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Wow that's brutal... and sad. Vorkosigan

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.