The Jesus Tomb Hoax

Chase March 4th, 2007

Above, you can see an image of the inscription found on the “Jesus son of Joseph” ossuary.  You’ll note, even if you don’t read ancient semitic languages, that the writing is unusually sloppy. Also not the scribble that the blue arrow is pointing to. The Jesus film maker’s would have folks believe that is a drawing of the cross, thus further linking the bone box to THE Jesus. Call me crazy, but I don’t really see a cross there.  This image highlights a pretty big problem for the whole Jesus Family tomb theory - it’s not very, very clear that what you see above spells out the name Jesus, or in Hebrew the name Yeshua. (Keep in mind that Hebrew had no written vowels, so you the name represented above is merely four consonants.)  For those who would claim the Talpiot tomb is the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth, there are three major problems with the inscriptions on the ossuaries:

1. The primary problem is represented in the image above - many experts who have examined the ossuary can’t tell if the name listed is “Yeshua” or “Hanun”, since many semitic characters look so much alike.
2. The inscriptions on the ossuaries are in different languages! Four of the boxes are inscribed with Aramaic, one is in Hebrew, while the sixth, purported to belong to Mary Magdalene, is in Greek! This could indicate several things, including that those buried in this tomb were from different generations/time periods.
3. Finally, if one does grant that the name on the ossuary is “Jesus son of Joseph”, that title itself is quite odd. This is a title that is only used of Jesus once in literature (by his enemies). It is highly unlikely that THE Jesus of Nazareth would be in a tomb inscribed with the name of His earthly father. (see below for more details)

Again, here are excerpts from articles below that tackle the issue at a deeper level:

•   From the New York Daily News: Stephen Pfann, president of Jerusalem’s University of the Holy Land and an expert in Semitic languages, who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film’s hypothesis holds little weight:”How possible is it?” Pfann said. “On a scale of one through 10 - 10 being completely possible - it’s probably a one, maybe a one and a half.” Pfann added that the inscription read as “Jesus” has been misread by suggesting that the name “Hanun” might be a more accurate rendering. SOURCE

• From Ben Witherington: Jesus is never called ‘son of Joseph’ by anyone who knew him intimately in the NT— not by his family members, and not by his disciples. Indeed where this idea arises, for example, in John 6.42 the Jewish officials who are accosting Jesus call him ‘son of Joseph’ (cf. Jn. 8.41). These can only be called hostile witnesses, not those who were likely to have known the actual case. It is telling that in Nazareth itself, in our account in Mk. 6.1-6 in our earliest Gospel Jesus is called “the carpenter, the son of Mary” SOURCE

• From Cambridge/St. Andrews scholar, Richard Bauckham: The Discovery Channel film proposes to read Mara as the Aramaic word ‘the master’ (as in Maranatha). But, since we know that Mara was used as an abbreviated form of Martha, in this context of names on an ossuary it is much more plausible to read it as a name. This woman had two names: Mariamenon and Mara. It could be that the latter in this case was used as an abbreviation of Mariamenou, or it could be that the woman was known by Mariamenon, treated as a Greek name, and the Aramaic name Mara, conforming to the common practice of being known by two names, Greek and Semitic….In any case, it is unlikely that the close family of Jesus would have spoken Greek within the family, and so it is unlikely that Mariamenon belonged to that close family circle. The conclusion is that the name Mariamenon is unique, the diminutive of the very rare Mariamene. Neither is related to the form Maramne, except in the sense that all derive ultimately from the name Mariam. There is no reason at all to connect the woman in this ossuary with Mary Magdalene, and in fact the name usage is decisively against such a connexion. SOURCE
  

• Jesus Tomb
• Comments(0)