More on the “Tomb”
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:
- As McCane’s study has shown us, Jesus would never have been permitted to have been buried honorably with his family. Strike 1.
- The ossuaries in question were found in Jerusalem area. Beg pardon, but have they forgotten that Jesus’ family was from Galilee? Strike 2.
- 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].
