Layman

No, but they usually only lie if they have reason to. Many ossuaries were found in that area.

What evidence do you have that it was not from Jerusalem?

Ron Garrett

I suspect Jesus actually was not the son of Joseph and Mary, but rather Rose and Murray.

Historical/shmistorical. What difference does it make? The only Jesus we know is the theological construction. We have no other infomration about him and I have to agree that positive confirmation of the existence of a man named Yeshua, son of Yosef, brother of Yacov doesn't really change a thing.

Layman

Even if that were true, it points to identifying James by a better known Jesus.

But since James is a less common name than Jesus, it seems unlikely that this was the purpose unless the Jesus was particularly well known.

Also, this does not appear to be the custom or practice. Most other ossuaries -- even some including references to "James, the son of Joseph" have been discovered and did not contain any further identifying marks.

MortalWombat

All we have is the word of the guy who bought it from an antiquities dealer. Neither of which were there when the thing was dug up. We don't know who the dealer was, who he bought it from, who that guy got it from, and ad infinitum.

Until it can be identified idependently to have come from Jerusalem, I see no reason to take an anonymous dealer's word for it that it was found in Jerusalem, thus, it could have come from anywhere in the Aramaic-speaking world in the first century, which would increase the possible number of James-son-of-Joseph-brother-of-Jesuses. Until that occurs, I think the throwing around of numbers like 20 is kind of meaningless.

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: MortalWombat ]</p>

Layman

Still reaching. Still desparate.

Many such ossuaries have been recovered in the area. You have no reason to think the dealer was lying about finding it in such a place. It's a likely place to find such an artifact.

Do you have any evidence that such ossuaries have been recovered from places like Galilee?

SillyMonkey

MortalWombat,

I read this from one of the links... it appearantly gives scientific evidence that it came from Jerusalem...

"Laboratory tests performed by the Geological Survey of Israel confirm that the box’s limestone comes from the Jerusalem area."

Kosh

Now you're being ridiculous, Layman. The facts that have come out is that this thing showed up with no good evidence as to it's origins. It's from a collector (who won't reveal himself) who bought it from a dealer (who isn't revealed) who had motive to lie about it (money). Stone can't be dated, there is no algae on it, and the best you can claim is that the soot on the box is also in the inscription (which simply tells us that the source of the soot occurred after the inscription).

Nobody saw it dug up.

Nobidy saw it dug up with the inscription in place.

We have no idea where it came from, and yes, it is a little too "pat", don't you think?

The whole story sounds like an urban legend. Or like something Ron Wyatt would have "discovered".

You're the one who's deperate and reaching Layman.

Layman

All of your above statements might have some relevance if the authenticity of the ossuary was in doubt. But WB was assuming it was authentic and only questioning whether its origins were from Jerusalem.

Also, the limestone from which the box was made indisputable came from a quarry in Jerusalem.

There appears to be no good reason to question the Jerusalem origins of the ossuary.

And it sounds like you are disputing the dating. Is that correct? That's a whole other issue. But first, have you even read the various articles out there on this issue?

MortalWombat

You keep talking about evidence, but no one has shown any evidence of where the thing came from (the testimony of an anonymous collector who got it from an anonymous dealer notwithstanding). Thus, it makes statistical calculations as to the possible number of Jameses it could be refering to less meaningful. What is so hard to understand about that? Sheesh.

Steve Locks

There was a similar story a few years ago.

A quick websearch brought this up:

<a href="http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/orion/archives/1996a/msg00155.html" target="_blank">http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/orion/archives/1996a/msg00155.html</a>