Freethought & Rationalism Archive

godfry n. glad · 03-05-2003, 11:41 AM

Okay... It's now well past the end of the Royal Ontario Museum showing of the Jake/Joe/Josh ossuary and, according to the ROM staff, the ossuary "has been returned to its owner".

When I asked who the ROM considered the owner, they directed me to a BAR article that mentioned Oded Golan and the claims that the state of Israel tenatively had on the object. However, they did not delineate which of the two that ROM considered the owner.

Anyway... It should be back in Israel by now.

I'm curious as to whether the IAA has claimed the right to inspect the object and whether any of its staff (or, even better, Dr. Levi Y. Rahmani, at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem) has, or will have, the opportunity to do a comprehensive inspection of the object and the inscription upon it and issue a critical report...

I've a request into IAA, but they are not the best about responding.

godfry n. glad

Toto · 03-05-2003, 02:33 PM

The "instant book" will be coming out in two weeks:

The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Significance of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus and his Family by by Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington III

(not that I would encourage anyone to buy it.)

The publisher's blurb:

Quote:

Book Description
The first, definitive account of what scholars and the media are calling "the most important archaeological discovery" about Jesus, his family, and the Jesus movement, which Jesus' brother James led in Jerusalem after the crucifixion; the find reveals a whole new picture of Jesus' life as the member of a large family of brothers and sisters and of earliest Christianity as led by his brothers and closest friends.

How exactly does this one disputed archeological find (or manufactured relic) reveal that Jesus was a member of a large family of brothers and sisters?

Haran · 03-05-2003, 03:34 PM

Dr. Ben Witherington mentioned recently in a speech at a New Orleans seminary that the ossuary might travel to Houston, Texas for display.

Are you sure that the ossuary has gone back to Israel?

I believe Dr. Witherington also mentioned in this same talk that Oded Golan was the owner of the "Joash Inscription" as well.

Personally, I have a hard time understanding why these two are being criticised for publishing a book about the ossuary. Many scholars publish books on controversial discoveries. I see nothing wrong with it. I rather look forward to more information on the subject, which I obviously find quite intriguing.

As a matter of fact, a favorite "maveric scholar" around here, Robert Eisenman, published the controversial Dead Sea Scrolls. To this day, no one seems to be able to figure out exactly how he was able to gain access to them to photograph them.

Layman · 03-05-2003, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran

Personally, I have a hard time understanding why these two are being criticised for publishing a book about the ossuary.

I understand quite well. It's called poisoning the well.

godfry n. glad · 03-05-2003, 03:53 PM

My understanding from the pre-release notices is that Shanks and Witherington are pumping the authenticity of an object, and its subsequent authoritive proof of the historicity of Jesus, as the primary purpose of the book.

If so, it's premature. I'd wait for word from L.Y. Rahmani and/or his colleagues at Israel Museum, Jerusalem and the Israel Antiquities Authority before I put my reputation on the line like Ben Witherington is. Of course, Shanks has nothing to lose anyway, since he's already irrevocably besmirched his reputation.

I say, "Publish away!" It'll be all the better to hang them with.

godfry

Toto · 03-05-2003, 03:53 PM

They are being criticized for rushing to print before there has been an adequate amount of time to examine the ossuary. I doubt that the message of their book will be all that controversial. I fail to see how this is poisoning the well.

Layman · 03-05-2003, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
They are being criticized for rushing to print before there has been an adequate amount of time to examine the ossuary. I doubt that the message of their book will be all that controversial. I fail to see how this is poisoning the well.

How much time, in your expert opinion, would be sufficient Toto?

And who has been critizing them?

The fact is that publishing about the Ossuary is the best way to promote even further discussion and inquiry.

I don't know whether the book will be a good one or not. But I think I'll wait until its arguments and discussion are generally known before passing judgment one way or the other.

Toto · 03-05-2003, 04:31 PM

The answer to the original question:

Authenticity of Jesus Inscription Probed

Quote:

JERUSALEM (AP)--Israel's Antiquities Authority began studying an ancient stone box on Wednesday to determine whether it was used to bury a man who some Christians believe was Jesus' brother. If authenticated, the box could be the oldest archaeological link to the biblical figures.

The box arrived in Israel on Wednesday from Toronto, where it had been on display at the Royal Ontario Museum.

The Antiquities Authority set up two commissions of archaeologists, geologists and language experts to study the box, which bears the inscription, ``James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,'' and which Israeli and French scholars believe dates to between A.D. 50-70.

Toto · 03-05-2003, 04:36 PM

And more from my Google search:

Settler rabbis make holy sites central to coalition
(politics of archeology)

Quote:

Meanwhile, Middle Eastern scholars remain deeply sceptical of recent archaeological �finds� appearing to confirm biblical accounts including, most recently, bones claimed to be those of John the Baptist; the ossuary of Jesus�s brother, James; and an ancient tablet purporting to corroborate the Old Testament account of Solomon�s Temple.

�Archaeology has always been political here, going back to the start of scientific archaeology in the mid-19th century,� said Father Jerome Murphy-O�Connor, Professor of New Testament at the �cole Biblique et Arch�ologique Fran�aise in Jerusalem, who recalls being thrown out of the Temple Mount complex during the first intifada by an irate Muslim guard who overheard him talking about David and Solomon.

�When the first Christians came to excavate here it was to prove the Bible, not to increase the sum of human knowledge,� he said. �Just as the Israelis in the 1920s and 1930s used archaeology to boost their claim to the land, now Palestinian archaeologists want to find material to show pre-Israelite Canaanite possession. �Our ancestors the Canaanites,� is the slogan. They are just doing what the Jews and the Christians did 50 years ago; just as we lacked integrity then, so it is the same now.�

godfry n. glad · 03-05-2003, 05:21 PM

Ahem.... "then"?

godfry

03-05-2003, 11:41 AM	#1
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Ossuary, ossuary, who's got the ossuary? Okay... It's now well past the end of the Royal Ontario Museum showing of the Jake/Joe/Josh ossuary and, according to the ROM staff, the ossuary "has been returned to its owner". When I asked who the ROM considered the owner, they directed me to a BAR article that mentioned Oded Golan and the claims that the state of Israel tenatively had on the object. However, they did not delineate which of the two that ROM considered the owner. Anyway... It should be back in Israel by now. I'm curious as to whether the IAA has claimed the right to inspect the object and whether any of its staff (or, even better, Dr. Levi Y. Rahmani, at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem) has, or will have, the opportunity to do a comprehensive inspection of the object and the inscription upon it and issue a critical report... I've a request into IAA, but they are not the best about responding. godfry n. glad

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

03-05-2003, 03:34 PM	#3
Haran Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Dallas, Tx Posts: 1,490	Dr. Ben Witherington mentioned recently in a speech at a New Orleans seminary that the ossuary might travel to Houston, Texas for display. Are you sure that the ossuary has gone back to Israel? I believe Dr. Witherington also mentioned in this same talk that Oded Golan was the owner of the "Joash Inscription" as well. Personally, I have a hard time understanding why these two are being criticised for publishing a book about the ossuary. Many scholars publish books on controversial discoveries. I see nothing wrong with it. I rather look forward to more information on the subject, which I obviously find quite intriguing. As a matter of fact, a favorite "maveric scholar" around here, Robert Eisenman, published the controversial Dead Sea Scrolls. To this day, no one seems to be able to figure out exactly how he was able to gain access to them to photograph them.

03-05-2003, 03:53 PM	#5
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	My understanding from the pre-release notices is that Shanks and Witherington are pumping the authenticity of an object, and its subsequent authoritive proof of the historicity of Jesus, as the primary purpose of the book. If so, it's premature. I'd wait for word from L.Y. Rahmani and/or his colleagues at Israel Museum, Jerusalem and the Israel Antiquities Authority before I put my reputation on the line like Ben Witherington is. Of course, Shanks has nothing to lose anyway, since he's already irrevocably besmirched his reputation. I say, "Publish away!" It'll be all the better to hang them with. godfry

03-05-2003, 03:53 PM	#6
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	They are being criticized for rushing to print before there has been an adequate amount of time to examine the ossuary. I doubt that the message of their book will be all that controversial. I fail to see how this is poisoning the well.

03-05-2003, 05:21 PM	#10
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Ahem.... "then"? godfry

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.