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 The entry is bogus, and it’s pointless to try to edit the pages, because any changes will be rescinded by the party-line fascists who run Wikipedia.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:
http://www.bib-arch.org/news/forgery-trial-news.asp
[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.
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?