Josiah Concept Ministries

As promised, here is the link to James White’s Dividing Line program on the Jesus Tomb (free/high quality).

White plans to write an apologetic book for the tomb.  I had planned to do this as well, distributing it as e-book.  White plans to have his out “as soon as possible,” which is the same ultra-specific timeframe I will give.  More updates on that later.

And this is a link to a blog with more resources on answering the questions raised by the tomb.

One last item on this wonderful Jesus Tomb fiascoe, and then I will go to bed since it is late and I am tired.

CARM supplied some new data for me, that I think it is interesting to note for this discussion.  First, tombs were used for several generations in Jewish custom.  That means that these bodies are not necessairly representative of only one generation of this family, and they may have lived many years apart.  Second, this tomb has been disturbed and vandalized prior to modern discovery.  What may have been altered, defaced, or destroyed?  We may never know.

Finally, this article was linked to by CARM, and it backs up my wife’s theory (albeit in a different way).  My wife says that the name “Yeshua” also translates as “Joshua,” and therefore supposes that the person in the tomb may have been named Joshua, not Jesus. Jody is in good company with this theory of a misread name.  Stephen Pfann,  a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem, doesn’t think that the inscription says “Jesus.”  He thinks it says “Hanun.”

James Cameron certainly is getting his debate. Here are some quotes from around the news world on the so-called Jesus Tomb:

Let me just throw this out there for you. If it were something that was attacking another religion, because there’s this idea out there that Christianity is sort of, it’s fine, you know, you can try to debunk anything out there, but if you tried to do this to the Muslim religion or perhaps the Jewish religion there would be an outcry of huge proportions. [Martha MacCallum during a roundtable discussion on The Live Desk, source]

That reflects what my wife and I have discussed about Christianity for as long as I can remember: It’s okay to bash Christianity, but if you try to bash another religion, there are all kinds of consequences and lawsuits and stuff.

One person sums up the DNA evidence nicely:

Except the whole thing seems kind of pointless. DNA comparison only works if you have something to compare the bones to. Last I checked, no one had a Jesus hair follicle in their bathroom hair brush. Sure, someone might claim to have DNA that definitely belonged to the Christ, but there’s no way to prove it. And without absolutely proof positive Jesus DNA to compare those bones to, I don’t see how Cameron can prove anything. [source]

Again, Amos Kloner, the tomb’s discoverer, has had this to say:

“I’m a scholar. I do scholarly work which has nothing to do with documentary film-making. There’s no way to take a religious story and to turn it into something scientific,” he told AFP in a telephone interview.

     ”I still insist that it is a regular burial chamber from the 1st century BC,” Kloner said, adding that the names were a coincidence.

     ”Who says that ‘Maria’ is Magdalena and ‘Judah’ is the son of Jesus? It cannot be proved. These are very popular and common names from the 1st century BC,” said the academic at Israel’s Bar Ilan University.

     Kloner said that of 900 burial caves found within four kilometres (two and a half miles) of Jerusalem’s Old City and from the same era, the name Jesus or Yeshu was found 71 times, and that “Jesus son of Joseph” had also been found. [source, emphasis added]

The Israeli Antiques Authority made no comment on the press conference, “although in 1996 a spokesman said that the probability of the caskets belonging to the family of Jesus were ‘next to zero’” (ibid.).

Tim McGirk, who reported on the story for Time Magazine, says of Jesus: “His father, after all, was a humble carpenter who couldn’t afford a luxury crypt for his family. And all were common Jewish names” [source].

Finally, I repeat the words of National Clergy Council President Robert Schenck:

“Today, Hollywood director James Cameron, whose claim to fame is a fictionalized account of the sinking of the Titanic, unveiled a documentary claiming a coffin found in Jerusalem 27 years ago once contained the remains of Jesus Christ. Cameron employed archaeologists and DNA experts to bolster his assertion Jesus was buried along with his mother Mary, Mary Magdalene and a supposed son, Judah.

     ”Over the years, Hollywood has attacked and mocked Christianity, providing only negative portrayals of people of faith. It has produced films that undermine moral culture. Hollywood’s production of ‘The Da Vinci Code’ sensationalized a conspiracy theory that the Catholic Church engaged in a cover up of the real story of Jesus operating in the manner of a crime syndicate.

     ”According to Cameron, his film is no mere speculation, but historical fact. By claiming the remains of Jesus returned to dust along with other members of his family, the Hollywood filmmaker is denying the divinity of the Son of God and his victory over death. Cameron clearly intended to drive a stake into the heart of Christianity, since without the Resurrection, Jesus was only a mortal man.

     ”Media outlets should exercise restraint in reporting Cameron’s Hollywood fiction masquerading as scientific fact. All of Jesus’ contemporaries recorded Christ rose after being dead for three days and ascended into Heaven. For 2,000 years people of faith along and countless scholars have pored over the Scriptures, confirming their veracity. A Hollywood director is the least qualified to render any determination of Biblical truth. Not only so, but the people Mr. Cameron has partnered with completely lack credibility. One has been discredited by experts as a charlatan. This is nothing more than a modern day circus sideshow. At best it is pure presumption. At worst, it is pure chicanery.” [source]

It will be very interesting to see what will become of this story. I urge my readers to listen to James White’s podcast, The Dividing Line, Tuesday 2/27/07 at 11:00am Moutain Standard Time (for us Eastern Daylight Timers, that would be 1:00pm). If you can’t make the live broadcast, check out the link to it, which I will post later. You can also find it by clicking on the Alpha and Omega Ministries link on the left side of this page.

Limitations exist in any sort of statistical analysis. I find it unbelieveable that these so-called experts would even use statistics in their analysis of the Jesus tomb, since statistics can generally be made to say whatever you want them to say. This isn’t news; anyone who has taken an introduction to statistics can tell you that.

The “conservative” estimate that the tomb is anyone else’s other than Jesus’ family is 1 in 600. How did Cameron and his film crew arrive at this number? Well, they started with a set of assumptions and followed a logical thread.

First, they assumed that Jesus Son of Joseph would occur in 1 of 190 folks, Mariamne in 1 of 160 cases, Matia (Matthew) in 1 of 40 cases, Yose in 1 of 20 cases, and Maria in 1 of 4 cases. I really can’t find out how they got these initial numbers.

After calculating the odds of all of those names being found together, they divided the number by 4 to remove the chance of intentional bias. Then, they divided the result by 1,000 to adjust for all possible first century tombs, which yields a result of 1 in 600 chances that this is someone else’s tomb.

One thing got me: J.P. Holding is very well versed in the culture of first century Palestine. So, for right now, let’s trust his statement regarding the names inscribed on the ossuraries:

The names in question were outrageously common: Mary was the name of a fourth to a third of all Jewish women. Joseph and Jesus were Top Ten names. Apparently the people happy about this have forgotten how this was used as an argument against the “James ossuary”. (Claims of statistical analysis based on ossuary inscriptions alone won’t do anything to increase the odds….since the vast majority of people would have been too poor to have ossuaries.) [source]

These are very different numbers than the ones the filmmakers used. If a person were to use these figures as starting point, working with just those four names, and then use the same formula described above, the odds become 1 in 4. This bears repeating: to have two Marys, a Joseph, and a Jesus buried together in first century Palestine would occur one in four times. One-fourth of all first century tombs would bear those four names! In fact, here’s a better and much more detailed example.

Skeptics may argue that I haven’t proved anything. And I want them to argue that, because it follows that if my statistical analysis didn’t prove anything, than the filmmakers’ analysis didn’t prove anything either.

I knew that the infamous J.P. Holding would have somthing to say about the Jesus Family Tomb controversy. He has his usual uncaring attitude toward it, the old “Let come what may” spirit that pervades his site. Perhaps that’s the best attitude to have; until we actually can see the evidence that these guys have, there really isn’t a point to throwing a hissy fit about it.

Holding says:

Color me unimpressed by the blather going on about it. There are more than a few problems with identifying this bunch of boxes with anything related to Jesus:

1. As McCane’s study has shown us, Jesus would never have been permitted to have been buried honorably with his family. Strike 1.
2. The ossuaries in question were found in Jerusalem area. Beg pardon, but have they forgotten that Jesus’ family was from Galilee? Strike 2.
3. The names in question were outrageously common: Mary was the name of a fourth to a third of all Jewish women. Joseph and Jesus were Top Ten names. Apparently the people happy about this have forgotten how this was used as an argument against the “James ossuary”. (Claims of statistical analysis based on ossuary inscriptions alone won’t do anything to increase the odds….since the vast majority of people would have been too poor to have ossuaries.) Strike 3.

Looking around a bit, I found that the discoverer of these ossuaries some years ago, Amos Kloner, made points 2 and 3 himself in saying that these had nothing to do with the Jesus of Christianity, and added that his family was too poor to afford such luxuriant burial accommodations. Indeed he’s apparently reaffirmed his doubts in the face of the renewal of these claims, telling the Jerusalem newspaper, “….it’s impossible. It’s nonsense.” Strike 4. [source]

I would urge Christians to respond by reminding detractors that the New Testament was written within the same generation of Jesus’ preaching. The body of it, especially the epistles, makes repeated appeals to eyewitnesses. Peter and Paul remind their readers that they saw many of the events that the Apostles are speaking of. Eyewitness testimony is very compelling evidence, and that is exactly what the New Testament is: Eyewitness testimony to our Lord and Savior. The evidence that the filmmakers are presenting is circumstantial. This makes a much weaker case than eyewitness testimony.

If that fails, remind the detractors what the man who discovered the tomb in the first place, Amos Kloner, said when asked if this could be the tomb of Jesus Christ: “It makes a great story for a TV film. But it’s impossible. It’s nonsense” [source].

The Anarchist’s coming is all Satan’s work. All his power and signs and miracles are fake, evil sleight of hand that plays to the gallery of those who hate the truth that could save them. And since they’re so obsessed with evil, God rubs their noses in it—gives them what they want. Since they refuse to trust truth, they’re banished to their chosen world of lies and illusions. [2 The 2:9-12 MSG]

And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. [1 Cor 15:14-17 ESV]

For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. [1 Tim 6:10 KJV]

I have just started to pour over the documents of the so-called Jesus Family Tomb that is going to be the latest attack on the historicity of the Christian faith. I agree with James White when he states “When the debate finally begins, the money will already be in their pockets, the damage done, and for the foreseeable future we will be dealing with people repeating their claims as established facts” [source].

The filmmakers apppear to be using DNA evidence, statistical analysis, and patina evidence. The DNA evidence is etched in the Western mindset as unquestionable, but when dealing with something of this age DNA is usually fragmentary and unreliable. Nevertheless, the filmmakers have used it to “prove” that the remains in the ossuary for Jesus do not share a mother with the remains in the ossuary for Marymne. This means that the two were likely a married couple.

Statistical analysis observes the occurances of the names in first century Jerusalem, and determines that the chances of this being some other family’s tomb is 1 in 600.

The patina evidence indicates that the ossuary missing from this tomb is the controversial James ossuary from a few years back. The problem that this creates is that the James ossuary has been proven a fraud, and its owner is on trial right now for forgery in relation to the ossuary. A photograph from the 1970s shows the ossuary in the house of the forger, which means that this ossuary cannot be the missing one from the Jesus Tomb.

Well, I for one will be doing a lot more research on this. The sad part of our culture is that we’re trained that once experts say things, they are right. Especially when those facts attack a religion with a 2000 year tradition. This is more evidence that the end times approach. This is part of that powerful delusion that Paul talks about in 2 Thessolonians.

One question I would like to pose to the folks behind this new menace to Christianity. Why, if this tomb existed in the time of Jesus, did His critics not publicize its location or take the body out and parade it around town for all of Jesus’ followers to see back in that time period? Christianity is based on the Ressurection of Jesus, His victory over death. If He died same as all mortal men, then our faith is in nothing. The hostile witnesses of the day outnumbered the friendly ones. One would only imagine that this tomb would be their favorite spot to point to, write about, preach about, and send Christians to if it is what the filmmakers purport it to be.

Yes, finally, after a short absense, I have returned.

My wife attempted to move the computer stand, and unfortunately it broke in the process.  While this had nothing to do with my ability to use the actual computer,  I had no place to set it up until we were able to finish some more cleaning in the apartment.  Now that monkey is off our backs, so to speak, we have been able to set up the computer and that means that I can return to my usual attempt to blog three times per week and post one article.

I was greeted by a most unfortunate find when returning to the apologetic front: the news of the “discovery” of “Jesus’ tomb.”  Obviously, I am a firm believer in biblical inerrancy, a conviction that has become stronger by studying the writings of Josh McDowell.  As such, I believe the biblical account of Jesus rising from the dead and ascending body and soul into heaven to be the accurate history.

As such, Jesus would have no earthly tomb save the one that He lay in prior to His resurrection.  This one, of course, would not house His father, nor His brother.  I do not share the Catholic belief in the Assumption of Mary, but I don’t believe that Mary would be in this tomb either.  She lived with John, the “disciple whom Jesus loved.”  Tombs were for the rich, hardly how one would describe a simple carpenter in days before trade schools and labor unions.

I will follow this story closely, and make every effort to watch (or TiVo) the Discovery Channel special that will follow.  I may try to buy the book, but I’ll have to see.  I hate throwing money at ignorant people like that; it only encourages them to produce more material.

On a side note, I try to do things right in this ministry.  Preach the gospel delivered once and for all to the saints, and I try to do it with prayerful reverence.  Yet it is difficult to get a wide readership.  But the world stops when the Virgin Mary appears in a damn sheet pan, and people flock to see it by the thousands.

So, am I wrong in what I am doing?  No, on the contrary, this only proves that I am right and they are wrong.

It apppears as though the news that Tom Cruise is Scientology’s Christ-like figure may not be true after all.  A Scientologist commented on my earlier post and sent me to a blog that attempts to set the record straight, or at least is run by someone who disputes that the claim was ever made in the first place.

This is refreshing.

Of course, the truth is always relative in Scientology; so who knows what is really going on here.

Apologist J.P. Holding of Tekton Apologetics Ministry has awarded one his coveted Screwball of the Month Awards to a site I write for, GotQuestions.org. The disputed page reads thus:

The amillennial view comes from interpreting unfulfilled prophecy differently than how non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted. Non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted literally or normally. But according to the amillennialist, unfulfilled prophecy is to be interpreted allegorically, or non-literally. This is called using a dual hermeneutic. Hermeneutics is the study of the principles of interpretation. The amillennialist assumes that all unfulfilled prophecy is written in symbolic or figurative language. Therefore, the amillennialist will assign different meanings to those parts of Scripture than the normal, contextual meanings of those words.

     The problem with interpreting unfulfilled prophecy allegorically is that this allows for a wide range of meanings. Unless you interpret Scripture in the normal sense of how written language is interpreted, there won’t be One meaning. Yet God, the ultimate author of all of Scripture, did have One specific meaning when he gave Scripture to be written to the human authors. Though there may be many applications to life from a passage of Scripture, there is only one meaning, and that meaning is what God intended it to mean. Also, the fact that fulfilled prophecy was fulfilled literally is the best reason of all for assuming that unfulfilled prophecy will also be literally fulfilled. The prophecies concerning Christ’s first coming were fulfilled literally. Therefore, prophecies concerning Christ’s second coming should also be expected to be fulfilled literally. For these reasons, an allegorical interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be rejected and a literal or normal interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be adopted. [source]

Well, I can’t say that I agree with the passage’s argument. I believe that prophetic visions, such as Revelation, are allegorical symbols with keys in other Scriptures. The writers are arguing for the Tim LaHaye school of thought, which, ironically, does utilize the double hermeneutic. For example, we ascribe a meaning of one year to a day in the vision of Daniel’s seventy weeks. However, when discussing the Antichrist’s rule in Revelation, the same idea of forty-two months is described as forty-two literal months.

Why the double hermeneutic? Revelation is clearly using the same symbolic language of Daniel. Isn’t it infinitely more likely that we’re talking about a reign of forty-two prophetic months, or 1,260 years? This is also applied to the creatures of Revelation: the Beast is a man, but the demon-locusts are literal demon locusts. Again, why the double hermeneutic? Either we’re talking about a great hulking beast and demon-locusts, or we’re talking about a man and an earthly army described by the symbols on the locusts.

But, I digress. I had always hoped to steer clear of the dubious Screwball Award, however indirectly I may have earned one. In this case, a flub in someone else’s eschatology posted on a ministry I associate with.

Obviously, we both can’t be right. I can only humble myself before God and pray that He shows which one of us is in error, swiftly, so that we (as teachers and defenders of His word) do not lead others astray.

But, I am proud to say, that Jerry from I Talk to God won a website award, and that I nominated him for it!  So this month, I actually contributed to both sides of the Screwball Awards.  Isn’t that a happy day?

This is great stuff! It brings me great joy to see God working in this world, and to know that He still uses us sinful creatures for His purposes.

A while back, I blogged on the Blasphemy Challenge, which is a disservice being done to the community by the oxymoronic Rational Response Squad. The challenge is to declare, on a YouTube video, that you deny the existence of the Holy Spirit. I’ve covered this in the past, but it bears repeating: the Unforgivable Sin is a sin of action, not of words. In committing this sin, you are continuously denying God by your lifestyle, thoughts, choices, actions, and condition of heart; not by making a one-time verbal declaration. Obviously, this isn’t what the folks who have taken the so-called challenge are actually doing–they are making the declaration, but we don’t know what they really believe or how they live their lives.

Well, now a series of websites has risen up to answer the Blasphemy Challenge. I love what they are doing in the name of Jesus, and so I provide their sites here.

• Challenge the Blasphemy: praying for all the folks who have accepted the Blasphemy Challenge.
• Challenge Blasphemy: collecting testimonies of former atheists. I can’t endorse the prophecy links on this site.
• The Christian Challenge: have you read the Bible?