Josiah Concept Ministries

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].