Marc's Musings

It bothers me to post about the upcoming hoaxumentary about the Jesus Tomb. I don’t like to give these things more PR. But I know things showing on TV can seem convincing.

The idea is that a couple of bone containers (ossuaries) were found, on with “Jesus son of Joseph,” another with “Mariemne.” So non-scholars are saying it has to be Jesus of Nazareth and Mary Magdelene.

Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua and Mariemne/Mary/Miriam were common names in Second Temple Judaism (our 1st century). Why wouldn’t they be? Joshua and Miriam were two of Moses’ top confidants and advisors. Naming a kid “Moshe” would seem a bit presumptuous, but Joshua or Mary had less of a stigma. Joseph, the one who’d been second in command in Egypt, was popular too.

So even if these names were on a tomb, it’s a far cry from being “proof” that they’re linked to Jesus of Nazareth. This claim is like someone 2000 years in the future seeing a couple of tombs with the names “George” and “Barbara” and automatically, uncritically, claiming this was the burial site of the Bush family.

I read a great article on the on the whole thing here.

It quotes Bar-Ilan University Prof. Amos Kloner, the Jerusalem District archeologist who officially oversaw the work at the tomb-cave in 1980 and has published detailed findings on its contents as saying:

“It makes a great story for a TV film,” he told The Jerusalem Post. “But it’s impossible. It’s nonsense.”

[Update 3/1: The articles and editorials continue to condemn this:

These film-makers are peddling twaddle about Jesus

Secular Scholars Back Christian 'Jesus Tomb' Arguments]

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Other Possibly Related posts:

1. What’s in a name?
2. It’s all about the Story
3. Major Parenting Hurdle Passed
4. jason clark: I saw Jesus last night
5. Feeling the L-O-V-E…