Name:R. Kirk Kilpatrick •
Title: Chevron and circle point to cult of Caesar •
Date posted: 03/28/07 3:27
Q: See www.confirmedword.blogspot.com for March 23 entry on the "chevron and circle" actually being the roofline and shield symbol from the temple of Augustus seen on coins of Herod Philip II from that time. Christians would not mark their tomb doorway with a symbol of Emperor worship.
Name:Anchorite •
Date: 03/28/07 4:22
A: The chevron is open the circle is open
Name:Anchorite •
Date: 03/29/07 3:36
A: As I posted elsewhere, I saw a pic of an ossuary with wishbone and rings on it. It looks fairly likely that the Chevron and Circle may not carry some unique significance attached to early judeo-christians. My enthousiasm is losing its hard edge.
Name:R. Kirk Kilpatrick •
Date: 03/29/07 16:57
A: Sensatonal claims have surrounded ossuaries for more than a century.
In 1873 Charles Clermont-Ganneau made sensationalist claims about several ossuaries upon finding a “funerary cave” near Bethany. The Hebrew inscriptions on these ossuaries included the names: “Salome, Judah, Simeon son of Jesus, Martha, Eleazar (Lazarus), and Salampsion.” The Greek inscriptions “provided the names Jesus, Nathaniel, Hedea, Kythras, Moschas, and Marias.” The name Jesus appeared “three times in all” [Kraeling, 18].
In 1931 there was a flurry of activity among reporters distributing the story that “the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth had been found” due to the misunderstanding of a presentation by Professor E. L. Sukenik to the German Archaeological Society with regard to an ossuary that had the inscription: “Jesus, son of Joseph” [Kraeling, 18].
In 1946, Carl H. Kraeling reflected “Under a date of October 3, 1945 many American newspapers carried brief accounts of an archaeological discovery made at Jerusalem.” This time the discovery was at Talpiot. Kraeling continued, “Between them the accounts provide an interesting example of what happens to a simple record of fact when handled by sensation-hunting newspaper reporters.” The papers carrying sensationalist headlines included the New York Times, New York Daily, and the London Daily Herald, where it was written:
“…what is believed an eyewitness account of the death of Christ has been discovered by Arabs digging in the foundations of a house outside of Jerusalem. Described by the chief archaeologist of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem as a “most important discovery,” the Greek writings were believed the work of a family of Jewish disciples who stood among the multitudes on Calvary. A bitter and moving lamentation, the account was probably written within a few weeks of the crucifixion. It was incased in four stone coffins in a vault within the house, which is on the road to Bethlehem” [Kraeling, 16].
In the next issue of Biblical Archaeologist, G. E. Wright wrote: “The last number of the B.A. contained the interesting article by Professor Carl Kraeling on the urns reported last October as being the earliest witness to the death of Jesus Christ. It adequately debunked the whole thing, and showed that what we have here is merely another discovery of some Jewish ossuaries.” He also wrote that a “certain Mohammedan paper in Palestine… will have to look for other grounds on which to challenge the belief in the resurrection of Jesus” [Wright, 43].
The Official Guide to Israel in 1950, said, “About seven hundred metres behind Talpiot a tomb was excavated in 1945 and several ossuaries containing human bodies were found. Inscriptions and coins proved that the burial in the tomb took place in the years 41-42. Two ossuaries were found marked with the word “Jesus,” and some others have so far been undeciphered. It has therefore been assumed that followers of Jesus had been buried in this tomb. If this assumption proves correct, this tomb would show the earliest historical evidence known about the followers of Jesus” [Official Guide to Israel, Tel Aviv: 1950, 247].
A: Thank you R. Kirk Kilpatrick... How satisfying is the big picture!
Name:R. Kirk Kilpatrick •
Date: 03/30/07 19:30
A: Thank you, Anchorite, for taking time to weigh the evidence.
Name:R. Kirk Kilpatrick •
Date: 04/01/07 2:37
A: The occurence of the "symbol" above the tomb door on coinage from the area and from the time contradicts (www.confirmedword.blogspot.com for March 23 entry) the assumption of the film "Lost Tomb..." On the "statistics" of tomb, please see:
Special Report: Has James Cameron Found Jesus's Tomb or Is It Just a Statistical Error?
Should You Accept the 600-to-One Odds That the Talpiot Tomb Belonged to Jesus?
By Christopher Mims
Excerpt:
Amo-ng- the assumptions that Feuerverger made to yield his odds: that the scholarly text he used as a source of names (to determine the frequency and distribution of Jewish monikers in the era of Jesus) was a representative sample of the five million Jews who lived during that era. He assumed this even though the text, called the Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity was published in 2002 and only includes 2,509 names.
Scan The Lexicon of Jewish Names, which includes names from ossuaries, ancient texts and every other source available, and you will learn that the names unearthed in the so-called Jesus Family Tomb were among the most common of that era. One in every three women listed in the Lexicon was named Mary, for instance, and, at that time, one in every 20 Jewish men was called Yeshua, or Jesus.
Tal Ilan, who compiled the Lexicon of Jewish Names and who vehemently disagrees with the assertion that this could be Jesus' tomb, says that the names found in the tomb "are in every tomb in Jerusalem. You can get all kinds of clever people who know statistics who will tell you that the combination is the unique thing about [these names], and probably they're right - if you want just exactly this combination it's more difficult to find. But my research proves exactly the opposite - these are the most common names that you could expect to find anywhere."
See also: Wall Street Journal—
Odds of 'Lost Tomb' Being Jesus' Family Rest on Assumptions
March 9, 2007; Page B1
Excerpt:
B-ut- the one-in-600 calculation is based on many assumptions about the prevalence of the names and their biblical significance. For purposes of his calculations, Prof. Feuerverger relied on new scholarly research that links the inscription "Mariamene e Mara" with a name for Mary Magdalene. (The filmmakers suggest that she was Christ's wife and that they are buried with a son, Judah -- claims hotly denounced by traditional Christians.)
Had the professor assumed the inscription could be for any Mary, a very common name then, it would be far less likely that Christ's family is in the tomb. The mathematical finding would become "statistically not significant," Prof. Feuerverger tells me. Similarly, the name "Yose" -- as one of Jesus' four brothers was called in the Gospel of Mark -- is a derivative of Yosef, another common name. There, too, the finding would be less conclusive if the professor had considered "Yose" applicable to any Yosef.
Even if there was consensus on the interpretation of the names, there are no comprehensive records showing how frequently they occurred in the population at that time. Prof. Feuerverger relied on modern books about ossuaries and ancient texts to tally the occurrence of certain names in the area then. That falls far short of a complete census.
"As you pile on more assumptions, you're building a house of cards," says Keith Devlin, a Stanford mathematician and NPR's "Math Guy." (Scientific American also challenged the calculation on its Web site.)
Name:R. Kirk Kilpatrick •
Date: 04/03/07 14:39
A: See also:
http://www.uhl.ac/blog/
March 31, 2007
Prof. Bovon cries foul in the use of his work
Filed under: Uncategorized — drstephenpfann @ 4:56 pm
Disclaimers from Key Experts Used in the “Lost Tomb” Documentary, Part One:
Prof. Bovon: Mariamne is not the Historical Mary Magdalene of the First Century
The filmmakers of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” and their advisors have asserted Mary Magdalene’s name in the apocryphal Acts of Philip as being “Mariamne” and that this was also the current and accurate name for the actual historical person, Mary Magdalene of the first century. They based this upon the important discovery of Prof. François Bovon of Harvard University, who published a recently discovered copy of the Acts of Philip, the first complete copy to be discovered. However, Prof. Bovon wants to clarify that he did not in any way state that the name “Mariamne” of the Acts of Philip should be the linked to the historical Mary Magdalene of the first century. The Acts of Philip presents the figure “Mariamne,” who both evangelized and baptised, as–geographically improbably–both the sister of Philip of Bethsaida and of Martha of Bethany (and therefore, of Lazarus). Bovon actually proposed that this Mariamne was the same character whose persona in time evolved to become the fictitious Gnostic sage and evangelist, more closely linked to the Mary of Magdala in the Manichean Psalms, the Gospel of Mary, and the Pistis Sofia. Based upon apocryphal stories such as these, which speak of a close relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus, and which give a high prominence to her in the early church, the storywriters of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” have surmised that Jesus and Mary were married and even produced a family. Of these three assumptions—(1) that the name of Mary Magdalene was not Maria or Mariam, as recorded in the Gospels, but rather Mariamne; (2) that the Mariamne of the Acts of Philip is to be identified with Mary Magdalene, though the Acts of Philip never says so explicitly, and (3) that Jesus was married and fathered a child—none is supported by any of the earliest records dealing with these individuals, namely the canonical Gospels and Josephus.
Cf. Bovon’s disclaimer on this issue on the SBL Forum site:
http://www.sbl-site.o-rg/Article.aspx?ArticleId=65-6-
Name:gnostic knowledge •
Date: 09/30/07 20:10
A: you are overlooking Hedin 44 .JEWISH
Yehohanaan ,high priest & council of the jews
Hebrew.Although this symbol is late bc it is a jewish sign of pomagranate between horns & is a jewish symbol.It matches the symbol above the tomb.Inthe examples of ancient items in my collection, it matches exactly.
As we all know jesus was jewish.Why would it be so hard to belive that judeo christians sawJesus as the "true" high priest to God?Would not these symbols be known to him? I think not.
Name:gnostic knowledge •
Date: 09/30/07 20:15
A: i disagree ,since what you are referring to is not above the tomb.it is a hebrew symbol.
