Posted on 11/01/2002 10:45:35 AM PST by Polycarp
COMMENTARY
A Discovery That's Just Too Perfect
Claims that stone box held remains of Jesus' brother may be suspect.
By Robert Eisenman Robert Eisenman is the author of "James the Brother of Jesus" (Penguin, 1998) and a professor of Middle East religions and archeology at Cal State Long Beach.
October 29 2002
James, the brother of Jesus, was so well known and important as a Jerusalem religious leader, according to 1st century sources, that taking the brother relationship seriously was perhaps the best confirmation that there ever was a historical Jesus. Put another way, it was not whether Jesus had a brother, but rather whether the brother had a "Jesus."
Now we are suddenly presented with this very "proof": the discovery, allegedly near Jerusalem, of an ossuary inscribed in the Aramaic language used at that time, with "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." An ossuary is a stone box in which bones previously laid out in rock-cut tombs, such as those in the Gospels, were placed after they were retrieved by relatives or followers.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Not possible. Since Jesus was the son of God and Mary, the only way he could have half-brothers would be for God to have sons with another woman or for Mary to have other children with an earthly man. Sons of Joseph would be step brothers at best -- actually not true brothers at all -- no half or full relation.
But all these assessments are based on two suppositions: that the box is not a forged item and that the James, Joseph and Jesus inscribed on it are the ones in the Bible. Neither is a foregone conclusion. The history of the ossuary is murky. It was probably looted from a burial cave decades ago. The Biblical Archaeology article includes testimony by geologists and experts in ancient writing with sufficient credibility to convince scholars that the box is not a fake and probably does date to within four decades of A.D. 62, the accepted year for James' martyrdom at the temple. Many academics, however, have expressed reservations about Lemaire's claim to somehow be able to eliminate virtually all the other Jameses roaming Jerusalem during that period. Thus what might otherwise have been a kind of archaeological/religious coronation turns into something slightly different: a scientific detective story with extremely high religious stakes....
...SOME SEMBLANCE OF CAUTION" by this point, however, many other scholars had parted ways with Lemaire. P. Kyle McCarter, chair of the Near Eastern studies department at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Md., notes that the log of inscription names from which the Sorbonne professor derives his percentages may not actually reflect their frequency in Jerusalem as a whole, contaminating his calculations. He comments, "It wouldn't be my inclination to quantify it in that way." (Meanwhile, Camil Fuchs, head of Tel Aviv University's statistics department, running numbers from the article, claims that Lemaire overestimated the final tally. Fuchs claims that there would have been only five possible Jameses.) Rather than focusing on the numbers, McCarter and other specialists with whom TIME talked seemed obsessed with two facts. All were horrified that the artifact had been ripped out of context, partly because looting is immoral but, more important, because, as McCarter says, it "compromises everything. We don't know where [the box] came from, so there will always be nagging doubts. Extraordinary finds need extraordinary evidence to support them."
Ah,okay - thought you were refering to the archeologist or something. At this point, we do not know this is a hoax. It is presumed that this particular point lends weight to that opinion. But frankly, it could have been scratched in by a believer in Christ with personal knowledge of the life and death of James. Right now, there is only conjecture.
Whether he was or wasn't is not addressed by Mark; that's my point.
You appear to be saying two things: that the Catholic Church holds that it is infallible, and that this ossuary (if genuine, I'm withholding opinion) diproves this alleged claim of infallibility.
Where does the Catholic Church hold that it is infallible?
You are certainly free to believe that, but Jesus on the cross was no longer a babe in arms. He was fulfilling His Messiahship. He did not give her as mother to all of us. He gave her to John to take care of. That seems clear to me because scripture states from that time on she was with him. Mary is not my mother - she is my sister in Christ.
You are free to believe that, however, I don't see scripture supporting any kind of parent/child relationships in heaven except between us and God.
You have no ability to put me on a hook.
This is a news forum thread discussing the fact part of the writing on this ossuary is a hoax.
Go discuss YOPIOS on the religion forum.
Refute post 131, which is relevant to this thread.
Is it your assertion or belief, which you seem to indicate that it was, that the BROTHERS mentioned in Mark 6:3 are the SONS of ALPHAEUS?
That seems to be what you are saying. Do I have that correct? Campion is now on record saying that he believes James AND JOSES were the sons of ALPHAEUS.
What say you polycarp?
Okay, now we are finally getting somewhere. Please post the verse where you think it says that James AND JOSES were the sons of ALPHAEUS. Thank you!!!
I have said nothing regarding this point. I simply ignored you.
What say you polycarp?
This thread is about the relative authenticity of the ossuary. Refute post 131. Thanks.
I will not answer any further theological questions on this thread from you. Don't bother asking, and don't bother trying to put words in my mouth.
Refute post 131.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.