Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 01-17-2008, 04:08 PM

Jerusalem Post: 'My husband knew it was Jesus' tomb'

Quote:

A small-framed, frail-looking lady, Mrs. Gat told the scholars calmly that her husband knew he had found "the burial tomb of Jesus Christ," and that he had "serious concerns and fears" over the consequences of his discovery. She noted that Yosef had been a child in Nazi-occupied Poland, and that with his bitter childhood memories still in mind, he had feared "a wave of anti-Semitism" might erupt as a result of the Talpiot find. She said she was relieved that the world had "changed for the better," and that this feared reaction had not come to pass.

Of the 5 panelists, Dr. Shimon Gibson, who was a young archeologist on the 1980 dig, and Eric Meyers, a professor of Judaic Studies at Duke University, rejected the idea that the tomb was Jesus'. Two others, Israel Knohl, a professor of Bible at the Hebrew University, and James Tabor, chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, thought it was "possible." James Charlesworth, professor of New Testament language and literature at Princeton Theological Seminary, said that the ossuary was too low class to hold a Savior, although he was open to the possibility that the tomb is related to the Jesus clan.

Simcha Jacobovici, the Israeli-born, Canadian-based filmmaker responsible for "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" was also at the conference.

Quote:

[Former Jerusalem District archeologist Amos] Kloner, who called Jacobovici "a liar" at an earlier session of the symposium, last year branded the documentary "brain confusion" that mixed fact with fiction and "dressed up facts" in a Hollywood-like manner that could easily lead laymen astray.

Kloner also told the Post last year that when the ossuaries were found nearly three decades ago, most of the bones inside had been badly decomposed. Due to haredi pressures put on the Israeli government, no anthropological tests were ever carried out on the remains, he said, and the bones were transferred to the Religious Affairs Ministry for immediate reburial along with assorted other remains found in various construction projects and digs. The location of the bones, which were then interred by the Jewish burial society, is not known.

Time Magazine: Jesus 'Tomb' Controversy Reopened

Quote:

Still, even after the furor over the film faded, the questions it raised about the tomb unearthed in 1980 continued to make waves among archeologists and Biblical scholars. A leading New Testament expert from Princeton Theological Seminary, Prof. James Charlesworth, was intrigued enough to organize a conference in Jerusalem this week, bringing together over 50 archeologists, statisticians and experts in DNA, ceramics and ancient languages, to give evidence as to whether or not the crypt of Christ had been found. Their task was complicated by the fact that since the tomb was opened in 1980, the bones of the various ossuaries had gone missing through a mishap of Israeli bureaucracy. Also gone were diagrams made by excavators that showed where each stone sarcophagus lay inside the tomb, and what the family relationships might have been, say, between Jesus and Mary Magdelene, who some speculate may have been his wife.

After three days of fierce debate, the experts remained deeply divided. Opinion among a panel of five experts ranged from "no way" to "very possible". Charlesworth told TIME: "I have reservations, but I can't dismiss the possibility that this tomb was related to the Jesus clan." Weighing the evidence, says Charlesworth, "we can tell that this was the tomb of a Jewish family from the time of Jesus. And we know that the names on the ossuaries are expressed the correct way as 'Jesus, son of Joseph.'" But the professor has a few doubts. "The name on Jesus's ossuary was scrawled on, like graffiti. There was no ornamentation. And there should have been. After all, his followers believed he was the Son of God."

Time adds the detail that Charlesworth thinks that if this is the tomb of Jesus, Christianity would benefit by the proof that Jesus actually did live,

and would survive with the belief that Jesus rose spiritually, if not bodily.

James Tabor's blog has not been updated yet, but probably will be.

April DeConick blogs about the conference, where she was on the panel for Mary Magdalene.

Quote:

1. There were two stats professors on the panel: Andrey Feuerverger (who had to create a new methodology to deal with the problem and is now publishing his 100 page result in a refereed stats journal) and his very vocal critic, Camil Fuchs (who was one of the referees for Feuerverger's article). The stats are fascinating, and everything is dependent on Mary Magdalene according to both professors - whether Mariamenou kai Mara refers to her. If she is "in" the equation, the stats are astounding, double what had been previously aired in The Lost Tomb film. If she's out of the equation, then the numbers are not statistically meaningful. Many participants wanted Feuerverger to run different scenarios with different assumptions, but he was hesitant because the paper that he has written has already taken so much out of him in terms of time and commitment.

2. So everything is dependent on Mary Magdalene, a woman. . .

The rest is well worth reading.

Stephen Pfann blogs:

Quote:

One more nail in the Ossuary

To my ears, most of those in attendance, in good academic form, would not totally rule out the possiblilty that this is the tomb of Jesus, but would say that the possibility is highly unlikely to a remote. This is far from being “50 of the top scholars in the world” now concluding that “the Talpiot tomb might very possibly be the tomb of the Holy family.” I would say that the participating scholars, equipped with improved methodologies and more knowledge than a year ago, would say that they are better equipped to judge, and that the tomb’s chances haven’t gotten any better (in fact, worse).

Let’s not be duped. All attempts to hijack the conferance to say anything different does not change the facts on the ground.

There was not a single archaeologist present who believed that it would be a responsible act to confirm that this was the family tomb of Jesus. However, mysteriously, almost from the grave, in the final session, the original excavator Joseph Gat, was said by his widow to have believed this. This seemed mysterious to the archaeologists present because it was understood that it took an epigrapher of the caliber of Joseph Naveh to actually decipher the inscription (which was only done after the death of Joseph Gat, by the way). Naveh concluded that, although it was difficult to read, the first name was most likely to be read as “Yeshua?” based in part on the fact that the name “Yeshua” shows up on another ossuary in the tomb. Because of this, he left the name “Yeshua?” with a question mark and all scholars since then, including Rachmani, left the question mark in because of the difficulty of the reading.

Pfann includes a link to his handout on the scripts on the Tombs.

Toto · 01-17-2008, 04:35 PM

The bloggers are just getting going on this.

Tzvee notes a typo in the Times story.

Jim West has it in for Simcha, as does Israelity Bites, who refers to Simcha as the self-dubbed Naked Archeologist.

Converse02 · 01-18-2008, 07:57 PM

"I don't think it will undermine belief in the resurrection, only that Jesus rose as a spiritual body, not in the flesh."

No matter what you do, it's like punching air.
But fortunately, it may convince some Christianity is a lie.

Toto · 01-19-2008, 01:14 AM

70 views, but only one comment.

Is this all hogwash and Hollywood effects?

The latest news is that the haredim are likely to block any further examination of the tomb. It's like Native Americans blocking anthropological research of human remains on this continent.

Quote:

However, Shimon Gibson, who was an archeologist on Yosef Gat's team in 1980 and has since excavated numerous sites here, said Thursday that haredi opposition would doom any such effort.

Such opposition, he went on, has long since shut down excavation by academics at Jewish burial sites here. The last such dig he could recall in Jerusalem, Dr. Gibson said, took place in French Hill 30 years ago.

The Talpiot tomb was turned into a geniza (repository for holy texts) before it was sealed, he noted, while the adjacent tomb still contains several inscribed ossuaries. "Haredi objections [to excavation there] would be impossible to overcome."

And the Christian Post calls the "Tomb of Jesus" film "Archeoporn," while the Catholic William Donohue call it a hoax.

Minimalist · 01-19-2008, 08:55 AM

Biblical scholar, Jonathan Reed, coined the phrase "archaeoporn" while on a panel discussion with William Dever after the original broadcast of the Jesus Tomb.

Converse02 · 01-19-2008, 09:15 AM

Facts are facts, doesn't matter if it comes from Harvard or Hollywood.
Even archeoporn can be subjected to the scientific method.

Minimalist · 01-19-2008, 02:02 PM

I think that was Reed's point. If you had seen Jacobovici's other abortion, The Exodus Decoded, or his abysmal The Naked Archaeologist series, you know that this guy plays fast and loose with the facts at all times.

One might go so far, as Kloner did, as to call him a liar.

Malachi151 · 01-19-2008, 05:34 PM

Well, I think it is effectively a hoax. Perhaps a hoax with will believers leading the charge, but the scholarship surrounding this tomb and claim is of the lowest grade. James Tabor just plain strikes me an an idiot, and its astonishing that he can hold the position he does. Simcha isn't even worth commenting on. He appears to be a delusional sensationalist.

andrewcriddle · 01-21-2008, 10:52 AM

This may be relevant http://dukereligion.blogspot.com/200...revisited.html

Andrew Criddle

Toto · 01-21-2008, 12:06 PM

James Tabor is now claiming that his critics' beliefs that Jesus rose bodily from his tomb and other non-scholarly irrelevancies are getting in the way of evaluating the claim.

He does make some interesting points on the different treatment given this tomb from other tombs - people are more willing to accept the tomb of Caiaphas on a similar amount of evidence.

Quote:

For many, even among the scholars who have weighed in on the topic, their declared belief that Jesus rose bodily to heaven, precludes that this tomb belong to Jesus from the outset. Most of the academics in this category would, however, quickly affirm, that such beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with their position that this "could not be" the Talpiot tomb. There are also sensitive issues such as a potential backlash of antisemitism, since this tomb is part of an official excavation of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Dept of Antiquities in 1980). Is holding custody of a “tomb of Jesus,” and dealing with bones of the Holy Family really something that the Jewish State of Israel needs to be involved in? There is also a tendency among scholars to avoid sensational topics, particularly those vetted in the media (”Ark of the Covenant” “Gold of the Exodus” “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” “The Davinci Code”), so that even to suggest serious consideration of this ultimate “sensational” site, a family tomb of Jesus, is bound to generate lots of scoffing and outright dismissal. The Academy is accustomed to consider far more standard subjects. And then there are the skeptics and anti-Christian folk who would dearly love it if the tomb of Jesus were found, as a way of poking the eye of evangelical and orthodox Christian believers. Finally, in a matter this sensitive, where there are no in situ photos of the excavation with the ossuaries intact, no bone reports, no official DNA tests done and now the ossuaries scrubbed clean, and not even a way to correlate the ossuary catalogue numbers with their locations in the site based on Gibson’s very clear drawing, those involved have been put on the defensive to explain the hows and whys, with resulting emotions and tensions.

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

01-17-2008, 04:35 PM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The bloggers are just getting going on this. Tzvee notes a typo in the Times story. Jim West has it in for Simcha, as does Israelity Bites, who refers to Simcha as the self-dubbed Naked Archeologist.

01-18-2008, 07:57 PM	#3
Converse02 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: North Carolina Posts: 883	"I don't think it will undermine belief in the resurrection, only that Jesus rose as a spiritual body, not in the flesh." No matter what you do, it's like punching air. But fortunately, it may convince some Christianity is a lie.

01-19-2008, 08:55 AM	#5
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	Biblical scholar, Jonathan Reed, coined the phrase "archaeoporn" while on a panel discussion with William Dever after the original broadcast of the Jesus Tomb.

01-19-2008, 09:15 AM	#6
Converse02 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: North Carolina Posts: 883	Facts are facts, doesn't matter if it comes from Harvard or Hollywood. Even archeoporn can be subjected to the scientific method.

01-19-2008, 02:02 PM	#7
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	I think that was Reed's point. If you had seen Jacobovici's other abortion, The Exodus Decoded, or his abysmal The Naked Archaeologist series, you know that this guy plays fast and loose with the facts at all times. One might go so far, as Kloner did, as to call him a liar.

01-19-2008, 05:34 PM	#8
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Well, I think it is effectively a hoax. Perhaps a hoax with will believers leading the charge, but the scholarship surrounding this tomb and claim is of the lowest grade. James Tabor just plain strikes me an an idiot, and its astonishing that he can hold the position he does. Simcha isn't even worth commenting on. He appears to be a delusional sensationalist.

01-21-2008, 10:52 AM	#9
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	This may be relevant http://dukereligion.blogspot.com/200...revisited.html Andrew Criddle

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.