22-10-2002 01:16									#1
	Physical evidence of Jesus found? Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Scholar claims oldest Jesus evidence
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Richard N. Ostling

Oct. 21, 2002 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- An inscription on a burial artifact recently discovered in Israel is "the first appearance of Jesus in the archaeological record," magazine editor Hershel Shanks announced Monday.

Writing in the new issue of Shanks' Biblical Archaeology Review, Andre Lemaire, a specialist in ancient inscriptions at France's Practical School of Higher Studies, says it is "very probable" the find is an authentic reference to Jesus of Nazareth and he dates it to A.D. 63 -- just three decades after the crucifixion.

Kyle McCarter, a Johns Hopkins University archaeologist, told a news conference that the identification is probable but he has "a bit of doubt."

"We may never be absolutely certain. In the work I do we're rarely absolutely certain about anything," he said.

That Jesus existed is not doubted by scholars, but what the world knows about him comes almost entirely from the New Testament. No physical artifact from the first century related to Jesus has been discovered and verified. Lemaire believes that has changed, though questions remain, such as where the piece with the inscription has been for more than 19 centuries.

The inscription, in the Aramaic language, appears on an empty ossuary, or limestone burial box for bones. It reads: "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Lemaire dates the object to 63 A.D.

Lemaire says the writing style, and the fact that Jews practiced ossuary burials only between 20 B.C. and A.D. 70, puts the inscription squarely in the time of Jesus and James, who led the early church in Jerusalem.

All three names were commonplace, but he estimates that only 20 Jameses in Jerusalem during that era would have had a father named Joseph and a brother named Jesus.

Moreover, naming the brother as well as the father on an ossuary was "very unusual," Lemaire says. There's only one other known example in Aramaic. Thus, this particular Jesus must have had some unusual role or fame -- and Jesus of Nazareth certainly qualified, Lemaire concludes.

It's impossible, however, to prove absolutely that the Jesus named on the box was Jesus of Nazareth.

The archaeology magazine says two scientists with the Israeli government's Geological Survey conducted a detailed microscopic examination of the surface patina and the inscription. They reported last month that there is "no evidence that might detract from the authenticity."

The ossuary's owner also is requiring Lemaire to shield his identity, so the box's current location was not revealed.

James is depicted as Jesus' brother in the Gospels and head of the Jerusalem church in the Book of Acts and Paul's epistles.

The first century Jewish historian Josephus recorded that "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, James by name," was stoned to death as a Jewish heretic in A.D. 62. If his bones were placed in an ossuary that would have occurred the following year, dating the inscription around A.D. 63.

The Rev. Joseph Fitzmyer, a Bible professor at Catholic University who studied photos of the box, agrees with Lemaire that the writing style "fits perfectly" with other first century examples and admits the joint appearance of these three famous names is "striking."

"But the big problem is, you have to show me the Jesus in this text is Jesus of Nazareth, and nobody can show that," Fitzmyer says.

The owner of the ossuary never realized its potential importance until Lemaire examined it last spring. Shanks himself saw the box Sept. 25.

Lemaire told The Associated Press the owner wants anonymity to avoid time-consuming contacts with reporters and religious figures. The owner also wants to avoid the cost of insurance and guarding the artifact, and has no plans to display it publicly, he said.

	22-10-2002 01:29									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Hmmm.. interesting.

	22-10-2002 01:35									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Surely the only people who would care about finding 'physical evidence of Jesus' would be christians and christians should not be looking for bones as according to their relgion they are supposed to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. I'm assuming that was a permanent rise. Otherwise it's a bit ****. He dies one day, rises another, dies a couple of weeks down the road.

	22-10-2002 01:38									#4
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Guess you didn't read the article did you Fab. No-one said they were Jesus' bones.

	22-10-2002 01:38									#5
	Inflate your Upload Space

Faboba: Jesus was (maybe) an historical figure, so any anthropologist would certainly care about finding physical evidence of his existence.

Also, I'm not a Christian, but even I know enough about the Resurrection story to say you haven't a clue as to what you're talking about in that regard...especially since we're not talking about bones here, anyway!

	22-10-2002 01:40									#6
	Put an end to popups!

Ah, the bones of Jim Davidson.

(Old joke. Since Jesus' family was descended from King David, they were almost certainly Davidsons).

	22-10-2002 01:56									#7
	Suffering from ads?

Well as a single person who influenced this world the most that would be some discovery to get some kind of physical proof about his family or him.

	22-10-2002 02:05									#8
	Put an end to popups!

Well it does seem to corroborate Josephus's account of James' death.

BTW, Josephus is the only non biblical account of Jesus of which I am aware. Are there any other?

Also, Josephus may have been old enough to be in Jerusalem at the time of Christ's death. He seems to know of Christ by either first or second-hand knowledge.

	22-10-2002 02:12									#9
	Support Apolyton

*mutter*

	22-10-2002 02:37									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: BTW, Josephus is the only non biblical account of Jesus of which I am aware. Are there any other?

Yeah there's other ones, but they're later than Josephus and are all along the lines of "those crazy christians say X." Also you can't trust the mentions of Jesus in Josephus since they've been obviously screwed with by Christians (for example Josephus wasn't a christian which is pretty obvious yet he calls Jesus the Messiah which is a blatant interpolation which makes it hard to tell how of the rest is equally suprius).

	22-10-2002 02:42									#11
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Jesus had a brother?
Hope he wasn't older, or the whole "virgin" Mary consept goes down the drain.

	22-10-2002 02:42									#12
	Support Apolyton

I thought he called him miraclemaker. Here is the refference to the text.

Apparently there is an Arab version as well at the bottom.

http://www.uncc.edu/jdtabor/josephus-jesus.html

	22-10-2002 02:49									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

People can claim whatever they want. Doesn't make it true.

	22-10-2002 02:53									#14
	Get a bigger avatar today!

hmmmmm and if this is true that undermines that catholic idea that jesus didn't have brothers and that the bible REALLY meant that james was a cousin or something...

	22-10-2002 02:53									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Gangerolf Jesus had a brother? Hope he wasn't older, or the whole "virgin" Mary consept goes down the drain.

All christian believe that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born because of the holy spirit.
But Catholics believe that she kept her virginity forever, and protestants believe that after the birth of Jesus, she and Joseph were a normal couple with all the things that it implies, and that James and John (2 of the apostles) were biological brothers of Jesus.

	22-10-2002 02:54									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

wow same minute

great minds and whatnot...

	22-10-2002 03:03									#17
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Well, maybe in 200 hundred years the papacy will admit that Mary was a normal woman and that Jesus had brothers, last year they admitted justification through faith.It only took them like 4 centuries.

	22-10-2002 03:06									#18
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Plan Austral Well, maybe in 200 hundred years the papacy will admit that Mary was a normal woman and that Jesus had brothers, last year they admitted justification through faith.It only took them like 4 centuries.

did they?

huh... ah well isn't it amazing how papacy survives?

It is probably the oldes functioning institution.

They are trying to adopt, but will they manage that is the question.

	22-10-2002 03:15									#19
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I don't think anyone debates the existence of a guy named Josh from Nazareth who practised carpentry and was born roughly 2,000 years ago. It's the details that people are concerned with.

	22-10-2002 03:16									#20
	Tired of ads?

Are you sure about the Catholic doctrine? Jesus appears to have had several brothers and a number of sisters. I thought even this was in the New Testament?

But it now looks like archeology has verified Josephus. If Catholic doctrine denies that James is Jesus' brother, they may have to do some re-evaluation.

	22-10-2002 03:18									#21
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Ned, yes. Catholic doctrine believes that Mary was always a virgin even after Jesus' birth.

	22-10-2002 03:20									#22
	Tired of ads?

Ever seen Dogma? Coming from a catholic background I found it to be a very good film.

	22-10-2002 03:29									#23
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Yeah, SD, I saw Dogma. Just a bit wierd, in my opinion.

Like I said, Catholic doctrine must now re-evaluate the status of James.

(And while we're at it, they should clear Mary Magdalene's name. She appears to have been women from a wealthy family and was a patron of Jesus. She may have had seven devils cast out, but she was no prostitute.)

	22-10-2002 03:39									#24
	Inflate your Upload Space

I thought that Mary was Joseph's second wife and that Jesus had older brothers

(I am not sure about younger brothers)

Jon Miller

	22-10-2002 03:41									#25
	Full PM-box? Change here!

When it comes to reform, the purity of Mary does not really come high on the list. There are loads of tenets in catholicism that no-one really need care about - 'cept theologians and the devout.

Things like the use of contraception and the vetting of preists are more pressing issues.

	22-10-2002 03:43									#26
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

What is vetting? Just to ask as I have no clue.

	22-10-2002 03:43									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

My understanding of Catholic doctrine is that she and Joseph did have a normal relationship and had other children, but that she never lost her virginity.

	22-10-2002 03:45									#28
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

OFITG - Making sure they aren't pedophiles, for example.

Basically making sure they are bona fide - and not becoming preists for the wrong reasons.

	22-10-2002 03:46									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Priests should be allowed to get marry, and woman should be allowed to be priestesses for example.

If they condemd abortion, they shouldnt condemn condoms, that maximizes abortions.

	22-10-2002 03:49									#30
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara My understanding of Catholic doctrine is that she and Joseph did have a normal relationship and had other children, but that she never lost her virginity.

Other children without having sex?