Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Peter Kirby · 06-18-2003, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran
I can only hope so... I still have not heard all of the arguments. I do not take it lightly that some very influencial scholars have held that it was very likely authentic. I will be interested to hear their reaction.

Be prepared for similarities to the reaction to the carbon dating of the Turin Shroud.

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran
Wasn't it the IAA that produced the first report confirming the authenticity of the ossuary? And now the same organization pronounces that it is inauthentic? Did I miss something?

The earlier statements were made by a different agency. "The box was examined by two experts from the Geological Survey of Israel at the request of BAR. They concluded that the ossuary had a gray patina (or coating of age). 'The same gray patina is found also within some of the letters,' he wrote, 'although the inscription was cleaned and the patina is therefore absent from several letters.'" link So the lack of a uniform patina in the inscription was noted by them as well. We now know that the "patina" that was in the inscription is chalk dissolved in water.

I wonder how many bets were riding on this thing?

best,
Peter Kirby

Haran · 06-18-2003, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Peter Kirby
Be prepared for similarities to the reaction to the carbon dating of the Turin Shroud.

Truly said...

Quote:

The earlier statements were made by a different agency.

Ah... I don't know why I was thinking it was the IAA last time too.

Quote:

I wonder how many bets were riding on this thing?

Ha! Probably a ton. They should've had it up on the boards at some casino in Las Vegas!

Vorkosigan · 06-18-2003, 07:38 PM

Quote:

II, personally, am truly frustrated by the antics played out over this discovery. It just sickens me how polarized any discovery which pertains to Jesus becomes. I am truly frustrated that some immediately take up a new discovery like this as Christian relic and how others can so quickly and vehemently deny it.

It was obvious from the start that it was a forgery. Toto, myself, Sauron, Godfrey, and others were able to spot it as soon as the circumstances surrounding it had become clear. My own personal "vehemence" began when I was attacked by apologists and others for saying so, and supplying reasons why. Suddenly analysis that was routine when I was buying Song Dynasty porcelain became "unreasonable" and "narrow-minded." Fact is, the intolerance was all on the apologist side......some people simply refused to face facts, or see the artifact in the proper light.

Quote:

Can't we all just get along??

.....We can't get along, because there are simply too many crypto-apologists and outright frauds on the Christian side. Was anyone on the forgery side as nasty as Shanks? Did anyone on the forgery side sign a large, premature and ethically dubious book contract to utilize the ossuary as a propaganda vehicle for spreading the forgery faith? Did anyone on the forgery side mount hacking attacks on the computers of people on the apologist side? Did the forgery side travel around conducting meetings hoping to sway public opinion, like Lemaire did? Was irrelevant expertise mobilized to support the ossuary by the forgery side? No. The forgery side was guilty of none of these things. Meanwhile a sustained campaign was mounted by ossuary apologists to attack discredit the fraud side, and mobilize public opinion. No question where the fault lies, Haran: your side, not ours.

Artifacts like this deliberately appeal to constituencies that have a reflexive investment in their authenticity. Polarizationis inevitable, so long as there are religious identities are caught up in artifacts. That polarization is the result of a religious faith that has a deep investment in the historical reality of its founding myths. There is simply no way to escape it. As US evangelicals align with Israeli nationalism, more of these artifacts will appear, and the polarization will only get worse. We should all be thankful the forgery was amatuerish, and the IAA has some serious integrity.

Vorkosigan

unregistered_user_1 · 06-18-2003, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by godfry n. glad
I shall enjoy watching Shanks tap-dance around this one.

I wonder if he'll claim that the result is because the investigating commissions were "anti-Semitic"? Heh... It's not like he's not done it before.

I can just see the fundies screaming, "That's those Jews! They're Jesus killers! Of course they'd try to debunk anything that even suggested that Jesus might have existed!"

<deep sigh>

godfry

Heh. You've got that right...

Quote:

Those that are calling the ossuary a fake are the same lost souls still looking for the Messiah. If they acknowledged the authenticity of the box then they would be foreced into looking at the reality that the Christ has already appeared.

here

Quote:

I've done some reading on the ossuary, and from what I've read, proving it a fake is crucial to quite a number of people, including the entire Catholic church.

The reason being is because of their Mariology - they believe she is co-mediatrix with Christ, never sinned, and did not have any other offspring other than by Almighty God. Therefore, there *can't* be any siblings of Jesus, or she could not be divine as they claim.

It's a hot topic in some circles... I'm sure this is just what they've been wanting to hear.

from here

and my favorite:

Quote:

Its a miracle the vatican hasnt assasinated everyone thats ever seen the box.

News like that could cause damage to their fables.

from here

Somebody tell WinAce: I think we have a winner here!

Elvithriel · 06-18-2003, 08:21 PM

Now that it's solved, when will we get a discovery channel special on the forgery?

What do you mean we won't? That hardly seems fair.

godfry n. glad · 06-18-2003, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran
You mean the one that I posted right before you and mentioned this?

Yep... That'd be the one. 'Cept when I posted it, it was the first in a thread. I hadn't even seen this thread. Our posts were about 25 minutes apart, yours senior. The moderator Celsus merged the two threads soon after I posted up mine. I never saw your link.

Great minds, eh?

Here's the list:

"The epigraphic committee included

Avigdor Victor Horwitz and Shmuel Ahituv of the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev,

Ronny Reich of the Haifa University,

Amos Kloner and Ester Eshel of the Bar-Ilan University,

Hagai Misgav of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and

Tal Ilan of the IAA.

The physical examination committee included

Yuval Goren of Tel-Aviv University,

Avner Ayalon of the Geological Survey of Israel,

Elisabetta Buaretto, head of the radiocarbon dating laboratory at the Weizmann Institute of Science,

Jacques Neguer, head of IAA's stone restoration department, and

Orna Cohen, an experienced archaeological restorer."

When you find out anything about the IAA commission members, I'd like to know. Would you post it here for our edification?

Happy hunting.

godfry

Toto · 06-18-2003, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by godfry n. glad
Then, I'd recommend that somebody reobtain a copy of Rahmani's _Catalogue of Ossuaries in the Israel Museum_ and read the listing of colleagues that he thanks in his forward....match that to the names of the commission members...that should tell you who are Rahmani's protege's...or approximate it. I have a vague recollection of some of the names and think there are two or three that qualify.

Perhaps Toto can help us here?

Not me. Apikorus had a copy of that.

Toto · 06-18-2003, 11:52 PM

A fuller response from Shanks, Witherington, et al is in Beliefnet.com

Quote:

Hershel Shanks, head of the Biblical Archaeology Society, and biblical scholar Ben Witherington, Beliefnet columnist and professor at Auburn Theological Seminary, have been the most public proponents of the ossuary's authenticity. Today they issued a statement defending their position. Shanks, who co-authored the book "The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story and Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus & His Family" with Witherington last spring, said, "Some of the world's greatest paleographers, and two teams of rigorous scientists that have tested the inscription, have found nothing to question as to its authenticity."

. . .

Despite today's announcement, many experts continue to argue the box and the inscription are genuine. "The Israeli Geological Survey investigated both the patina on the box and the patina throughout the inscription," Jack Meinhardt, managing editor of the Biblical Archaeological Society's magazine Archaeology Odyssey, told Beliefnet. "They found that the patina in the inscription matched the patina on the box, meaning that they were both ancient patinas."

Edward Keall, senior curator at Toronto's Royal Ontario Museum, where the ossuary was displayed this fall, maintains that the ossuary's inscripton is genuine. The museum's study of the ossuary, he said, led him to believe that the "artificially induced patina theory was a false claim."

Vorkosigan · 06-19-2003, 12:33 AM

Neither Shanks, Witherington, or Keall has anything like the right expertise to make this determination. This is pure disingenuous horseshit. I hope they force Shanks out of BAR, because I suspect he is going to turn BAR into a rag for promoting the ossuary and denigrating the IAA. And that would be a double shame....

The IAA is concerned about the looting of ancient artifacts and has been suspicious of antiquities collectors, who often acquire their finds through dubious channels. This may also be prompting the IAA's efforts to discredit Golan's ossuary. "There's a vendetta against Oded Golan," said Ben Witherington.

I don't understand how these people live with themselves. Really, I don't.

Vorkosigan

Toto · 06-19-2003, 12:45 AM

Shanks founded and owns BAR - who could force him out?

06-19-2003, 12:33 AM	#39
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Neither Shanks, Witherington, or Keall has anything like the right expertise to make this determination. This is pure disingenuous horseshit. I hope they force Shanks out of BAR, because I suspect he is going to turn BAR into a rag for promoting the ossuary and denigrating the IAA. And that would be a double shame.... The IAA is concerned about the looting of ancient artifacts and has been suspicious of antiquities collectors, who often acquire their finds through dubious channels. This may also be prompting the IAA's efforts to discredit Golan's ossuary. "There's a vendetta against Oded Golan," said Ben Witherington. I don't understand how these people live with themselves. Really, I don't. Vorkosigan

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

06-18-2003, 08:21 PM	#35
Elvithriel Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 127	Now that it's solved, when will we get a discovery channel special on the forgery? What do you mean we won't? That hardly seems fair.

06-19-2003, 12:45 AM	#40
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Shanks founded and owns BAR - who could force him out?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.