Skip to comments.Ancient Burial Box Linked to Priest Who Played Part in Christ's Crucifixion
Posted on 08/03/2012 2:44:21 PM PDT by NYer
Yosef bar Caifa
Scientists at a university in Israel believe they have discovered an ancient burial box belonging to the family of the high priest who played a part in the crucifixion of Jesus as described in the Bible.
The burial box, or ossuary, was recovered from looters three years ago by the Israel Antiquities Authority.
On close examination the ossuary was found to have a rare inscription mentioning the names "Miriam," "Yeshua," and "Caiaphus."
Once the inscription was authenticated, archaeologists were astounded by what they had found.
According to researchers, the Caiaphus mentioned in the carved-in inscription may very well be the same Caiaphas noted in the Gospels.
In Matthew 26:57-68, readers are told that after his arrest, Jesus was taken to "Caiaphas, the high priest" who questioned him about his divinity.
The full inscription on the ossuary reads: "Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiaphus, priest of Maaziah from Beth Imri."
Maaziah is a clan name connected to an order of high priests who lived between the first century BCE and the first century AD, according to Yuval Goren, an archaeology professor from Tel Aviv University brought in to help authenticate the ossuary.
"Beyond any reasonable doubt, the inscription is authentic," Goren said in a press release from the university.
Researchers also believed that Beit Imri, if not the name of another priestly order, may actually be a reference to where Caiaphus' family lived before they migrated to Galilee.
If Beit Imri is indeed a geographical location, it was likely situated on the slopes of Mount Hebron.
The limestone burial box and its skeletal remains were likely recovered from the Valley of Elah, near Jerusalem, which is the same setting of the epic battle between a young David and the giant Goliath.
Most burial boxes of this kind were usually unmarked or simply offered the name of the deceased, so researchers having one on their hands that provides information about three generations of a single family was extraordinary, Goren said.
Other ossuaries have been discovered in the past, but have usually been found to have fake inscriptions.
Tha That is amazing on so many levels
A number of scholars hold that Yeshua’s mothers name was most likely not “Mary”, but was in fact Miriam, a much more common name in that place at that time.
Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiaphus
The ‘Yeshua’ mentioned here was Caiaphus’ SON who had a DAUGHTER NAMED MIRIAM.
11 Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
13 Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
14 And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
If Caiaphas had the body he wouldn’t have needed to tell the guards to lie and claim the disciples stole the body. therefore, this box never held the remains of Jesus.
It is Miriam. Mary was not even a name at the time, at least in 1st century Palestine. All (or most) of the names in the New Testament are the Greco-Roman versions of their Jewish/Aramaic names. Jesus was Jeshua, Simon likely Shimon, etc. It doesn’t matter substantively. I would like to see a list of NT names as they actually were at the time. I highly doubt that Luke, Mark, Philip, or any of the names we attribute the Apostles or Evangelists were their actual names.
I believe the inscription indicates that it held the bones of Miriam, granddaughter of Caiaphus.
If you read the article, it says nothing about the body of Jesus.
Um, you need to read the article. Geez.
This is an old story from August 30, 2011.
we’re all gonna DIe!!!!
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
Thanks NYer. [singing] down in the bone box, doo doo doo doo, down in the bone box, doo doo doo doo... [/singing]
You notice how there is always something that is revealed through time?
Forgive my ignorance, but why was a year old article brought up a year later? Read the article, but don’t see where they discovered anything new.
Luke is more likely than others to be the Holy Evangelist's actual name since he is of Greek origin.
Luke, Mark and Philip were either Roman or Greek names, they may not have been much different: Lucas, Marcus, etc. The Apostle Paul’s name changed from a Hebrew one (Shaul) to a Roman/Latin one.
Yerushaláyim—I like to hear the old/Hebrew way of pronouncing it. It’s sort of hard to explain why. (Jerusalem)
My favourite is Bartholomew—it is a compound name with a Jewish first part—Bar, meaning son, and Ptolmey, which is Greek. Anything that messed up both reflects the overlapping cultures and is almost certainly authentic.
Anyone else find it odd the mount of burial boxes found in the last few years that are supposedly linked to Jesus? Would this be the third (presumable) fake box?
This burial box was discovered in 1990.
The story was recycled again about a year ago, and catholicculture.org recycled it again in the last few days.
I thought I saw this very same thing on the ‘Naked Archeologist’ last year...interesting.
I need to read the article better. I was in my work car doing 10 different things trying to get home for the weekend.
I like the switch from BCE to AD all in the same sentence. Which dating style is it going to be fellas?
Whoever’s doing the funding?
The author would know best, assuming the author is getting funding.
The irony is that BCE is used to calm the sensibilities of non-Christians. Unless if means Before the Christian Era.
Wikipedia shows that this hasn't been determined, although the trial of Oded Golan certainly looks like a political witch hunt a la totalitarian regimes or the state of Massachusetts.
Wikipedia can kiss all our asses. The entry is bogus, and it’s pointless to try to edit the pages, because any changes will be rescinded by the party-line fascists who run Wikipedia. The court case showed that the IAA *didn’t* determine that the inscription was faked, it merely continued to *claim* that it was, and the experts brought in to investigate the artifact didn’t agree on authenticity — but the one expert who could tell if the inscription or any part of it were modern found that it was a single inscription (iow, part of it was *not* added later) and ancient. Those findings were made years ago, before the trial started, but ignored by the jokers who wrote the report conclusions for the IAA.
Biblical Archaeology Review:
[snip] The story was reported by Matthew Kalman in the San Francisco Chronicle, and from there around the world. He described Judge Aharon Farkash’s evaluation as a “humiliating collapse” of the government’s case and “a major embarrassment ... for the [Israel] Antiquities Authority.” [/snip]
By which I mean that the James Ossuary is not the ossuary spoken of in the article heading, this thread...
...others here could get mixed up, scanning comments, or else I'm mixed up. Straighten me out if I'm wrong.
This may be confusing to those who haven’t been following these articles since the articles refer to different ossuaries which were found at different times in different locations and at different times.
Bibilcal archeology and Biblical studies are often at odds and violent disagreements are common among adherents of one POV or another. The stakes are not only financial but involve the reputations of scholars—and nothing is more vitriolic than the arguments between scholars of different opinion.
And this is in addition to the reluctance of Israel to delve into these matters which involve the birth of a religious sect (Christianity) which grew out of their Jewish tradition, the opposition of Muslims to anything which involves Jewish life in Israel and Jerusalem before their Prophet, and the reluctance of Christians/clegy to accept any archeological evidence that might differ from their own parochial view.
Anything that has to do with Jesus as a historical figure is radioactive.
OK, OK don’t shoot the messenger. Why does the government of Israel care if Jesus had a brother?
OK, OK don’t shoot the messenger. I’m just trying to understand the controversy. Why does the government of Israel care if Jesus had a brother?
The government of Israel doesn’t care. Think of this a something like experts inside the Smithsonian arguing with experts outside the Smithsonian. The dispute gets more and more bitter until lawsuits are filed and there’s a trial. The ‘insider’ experts, of course, have government money on their side.
Is it possible that Caiaphas may have in his heart repented (like Nicodemus, secretly have believed, for fear of the Jews), and named his son Yeshua, after the one that he had allowed to be horribly, unjustly crucified? Since his son then named his daughter Miriam, the name of the mother of the one his father had allowed to be unjustly crucified, it is sort of like frosting on the cake, when it comes to making one think that this might be so. Might notorious High Priest, Caiaphas, very possibly be in heaven?
I admit it, I should have put on your blindfold and let you have a last cigarette. ;’) It’s not the gov’t, it’s some bureaucrats, which in most countries includes higher ed.
Well put! As always, FReepers rise to the occasion!
aaaaannnnn, it's inner-estin'. Always.
In Hebrew it is Yohanan, in Greek Ioannes as in Latin.
But if you look in Italy it is Giovanni, in German Johan or Hans, in Scandanavia and Poland Jan or Ivan, in Irish Sean, in French Jean, in Magyar Janos
Luke, Lucas, is Greek, and St. Luke was Greek by origin, so it is probably the actual name of the Evangelist.