Posted on 06/17/2003 1:49:47 PM PDT by NYer
A committee of archeologists and geologists commissioned by the Israeli Antiquities Authority is set to declare, perhaps as early as today, that the inscription on the James ossuary is fake.
The limestone ossuary, which its supporters say once contained the remains of James, brother of Jesus Christ, has been undergoing tests at the direction of the Antiquities Authority since it was returned in mid-January to Tel Aviv from Toronto. It had been on public display, for the first time anywhere, at the Royal Ontario Museum starting in November of 2002, where it drew 100,000 visitors.
Israeli state broadcaster Channel One featured an interview late yesterday with Gabriel Barkay, a prominent archeologist with Jerusalem's Barilan University, who said the archeological committee was prepared to declare the ossuary's inscription a fake in a report to be released this week or, at the latest, early next. Dr. Barkay is not a member of the Antiquities Authority committee, but said he had heard the verdict from a committee member.
Debate over the authenticity of the ossuary has been raging since last October when the Washington-based Biblical Archaeology Review announced its existence and published an article by Sorbonne scholar André Lemaire asserting that it dates from about the year 30 to the year 70. Most of the controversy has focused on the unusual Aramaic inscription on the side of the stone burial box that reads, "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." If authentic, the inscription would make the ossuary probably the earliest found archeological attestation of Jesus's existence.
In an interview yesterday with CTV, Dr. Barkay said the committee will declare that the ossuary itself "is authentic beyond any doubt." However, "according to some scholars," the patina (or calcified encrustation) found inside the letters of the inscription "is not ancient," Dr. Barkay said. This means that, in all likelihood, "the inscription was added to the pre-existing ossuary and therefore the inscription is fake."
However, Dr. Barkay stressed he had not read the committee's full, final report and that he doesn't "regard as a final answer" the information he has heard. "If it is a fake, it's a fantastically executed piece," he said.
Dr. Barkay acknowledged "the disappointment will be big among those who believe it" to be concrete evidence of Christ's presence on Earth. "It's touching to have something to touch." But "among believers, it shouldn't matter . . . James exists anyhow."
Oded Golan, the Tel Aviv collector who owns the ossuary, told CTV that he remains "confident" both the ossuary and the words incised on its side "are authentic." He said he didn't wish to comment now on what the antiquities committee may say "without reading the full report. . . . Let's wait." He added that the 15-member committee established by the Antiquities Authority "was itself problematic," but refused to comment further.
Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeological Review, said yesterday he had not seen or heard the Israeli TV report. "There's been all kinds of rumours" in recent months, he said. "I've heard some wild things . . . but nothing you can rely on."
I wish they would get this straight.
Dr. Barkay is not a member of the Antiquities Authority committee, but said he had heard the verdict from a committee member.
...the committee will declare that the ossuary itself "is authentic beyond any doubt."...in all likelihood, "the inscription was added to the pre-existing ossuary and therefore the inscription is fake."
However, Dr. Barkay stressed he had not read the committee's full, final report and that he doesn't "regard as a final answer" the information he has heard...."
This won't be the first committee in Israel to declare Jesus a full-fledged problem.
I agree, however, that the authenticity of the ossuary, the shroud of Turin, or any other relic is not significant to the truth of Christianity.
I wonder why different experts come to different conclusions. I was excited once about the shroud of turin until the experts released their report.
Amen to that.
It's truly amazing how many remember the carbon-14 test results (which, as it turned out, were inaccurate) but fail to read the OTHER TEST RESULTS from the shroud. One of those individuals is an agnostic attorney who set out to debunk the shroud, once and for all. He ended up writing a book, "Resurrection of The Shroud" and converted to Christianity.
Perhaps you missed these posts.
Man of The Shroud , which contains the results from some of the most sophisticated tests ever conducted on the shroud. You will be quite surprised by the results.
Which experts? Which tests? I just researched those two posts to you. It is impossible that you have already read them. You indicated that you were " excited once about the shroud of turin". Someone gives you supporting documentation and what do you do? You totally ignore it! That's a slap in the face!
You cannot compare the Shroud of Turin with an ossuary.
Okay ... you're new here, aren't you? I responded with my post #9. That post provides you with links to two previously posted threads that prove the Shroud of Turin to be authentic.
You did not click on the links and read the threads. You responded with "Do you think the experts were wrong about the Shroud?"
I replied by asking you "which experts" since the very links I gave you point to MANY experts whose findings DO INDEED suggest the authenticity of the Shroud AND which demonstrate that the Carbon14 dating test was faulty.
You responded with the above ?????
The shroud bears an image of a crucified man. The ossuary carries some letters engraved into its lid. The two have nothing in common.
Now, if you are still wondering about the Shroud AND are ready to accept that one carbon14 test was conducted improperly, then I refere you back up to post #9 where you can click with your mouse on the blue text. These are links to two excellent threads that have already run in this forum. More importantly, those links will provide you with documentation supporting the authenticity of the shroud. Okay?
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.