Toto

60 Minutes rehashes the story for Christmas.

Steven Carr

Golan is continuing to claim that he did not think twice about teh inscription.

Either he or Lemaire is lying, as anybody can see who reads what Lemaire wrote about Golan pointing out to him the unusual nature of the inscription, as it matched one in Rahmani's catalogue.

Toto

I caught the segment. It appeared to be written as if the case for and against the authenticity of the inscription were both equally valid possibilities, which seems at odds with the evidence. The most impressive scientific evidence was not discussed or was barely mentioned. Ben Witherington got a lot of air time, looking a bit like a televangelist. There were nice visuals of Jerusalem and piles of ossuaries and the antiquities market and other things that TV does well. Oded Golan was portrayed as an amateur pianist (references to his apartment were introduced with the sound of his piano playing from outside the building, then cut to him playing the piano). Golan sounded sincere.

The case in favor of authenticity was asserted, and Witherington ascribed bad motives to the Israeli Antiquities Authority, but no real evidence was presented for authenticity.

Epinoia

The trailer for the segment went something like this: "Could this be the greatest find for Christianity since the Shroud of Turin?"
When I told my DH this, he said: "Yeah--the Shroud of Turin is a fake!"
Hilarious and true, but I'm not sure the 60 Minutes trailer conveyed that. Someone who knows nothin' more than Jesus probably heard, "more Jesus near you: Stay tuned!"

Which evidence was this? Wow, what actually did make the segment (the instruments of forgery in the apartment, the obviously different handwriting, the lame-ass excuse that since the ossuary-finder was a Jew he knew nothing about Jesus...Jesus Christ, all this already makes Golan and BAR look like fools. What else is there?

Also, which one was Ben Witherington again? I missed the part where he said bad things about the antiquities authority. Such a remark should have been challenged. What motive could the IAA have for discrediting it other than truth or scholarship? If the ossuary got thumbs up it would no doubt bring more Xtian tourists and $$ into Israel. If IAA was going to lie, it would make sense to lie the other way.

Also, hasn't it been a year or closer to two since the ossuary was discredited? Christmas 2004: Creches out! Ossuraries in! Get one while they're hot!