Comments on: Number 5: The James Ossuary http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/ Presenting the facts regarding the "Jesus Family Tomb" Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:09:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2 By: Joe http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-7 Joe Tue, 06 Mar 2007 00:13:28 +0000 http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-7 The Israeli Antiquities Authority decided that the unprovenanced "James" ossuary on which Witherington gambled and loss his credibility was a fake. He is left with spouting conspiracy theories about the IAA in support of the forger and seller of fake antiquities, Oded Golan, and little else. But Witherington's words of suport aren't really about Oded Golan, or even about the so-called James Ossuary. They're all about Witherington. He used the so-called "James Ossuary" as a base to launch attacks on some very precious elements of the Faith of both Roman Catholic and Orthodox believers: "It is possible the inscription on the ossuary -- 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' -- provides us with a challenge in regard to some basic Christian assumptions about James. The Roman Catholic tradition is that Jesus' brothers and sisters actually were cousins; Orthodox Christians believe they were Joseph's children by a previous marriage. The inscription conflicts with both of those Christian traditions, in fact, for there certainly was an Aramaic word for 'cousin' that could have been used in this inscription but was not. If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states." (USA Today Weekend: http://www.usaweekend.com/03_issues/030413/030413jesus.html) Ambitious to "one up" these confessions, he overreached and is still overreaching. I almost feel sorry for Witherington, he only wanted use the phony James Ossuary to bolster a stock evangelical Protestant teaching that goes against one held by both the RCs and Orthodox and now finds his bone box being used to attack the very resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ! I was puzzled over Witherington's singlemindedness until I read that he stated that he will stand by the "authenticity" of the James ossuary REGARDLESS of the outcome of Oded Golan trial. In other words, despite his many protestations, he's not really interested in proof. Is it possible that the REAL dog that Witherington has in this Tomb fight is one that he hopes will separate his precious James Ossuary from those of the so-called Jesus Tomb, thereby giving his credibility a chance at restoration? Let's not be snowed under by the heroic number of dispatches that have been coming out from Witherington against Cameron & Jacobovici because he does indeed protests too much. It comes down to this: Witherington doesn't want us to see that he is reaping what he has sown. One phony ossuary has yielded a crop of ten. It's deja vu all over again for those of us who are sick of phony bone boxes being used against the Christian Faith. The Israeli Antiquities Authority decided that the unprovenanced “James” ossuary on which Witherington gambled and loss his credibility was a fake. He is left with spouting conspiracy theories about the IAA in support of the forger and seller of fake antiquities, Oded Golan, and little else.

But Witherington’s words of suport aren’t really about Oded Golan, or even about the so-called James Ossuary. They’re all about Witherington.
He used the so-called “James Ossuary” as a base to launch attacks on some very precious elements of the Faith of both Roman Catholic and Orthodox believers:

“It is possible the inscription on the ossuary — ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’ — provides us with a challenge in regard to some basic Christian assumptions about James. The Roman Catholic tradition is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters actually were cousins; Orthodox Christians believe they were Joseph’s children by a previous marriage. The inscription conflicts with both of those Christian traditions, in fact, for there certainly was an Aramaic word for ‘cousin’ that could have been used in this inscription but was not. If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states.” (USA Today Weekend: http://www.usaweekend.com/03_issues/030413/030413jesus.html)

Ambitious to “one up” these confessions, he overreached and is still overreaching. I almost feel sorry for Witherington, he only wanted use the phony James Ossuary to bolster a stock evangelical Protestant teaching that goes against one held by both the RCs and Orthodox and now finds his bone box being used to attack the very resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ!

I was puzzled over Witherington’s singlemindedness until I read that he stated that he will stand by the “authenticity” of the James ossuary REGARDLESS of the outcome of Oded Golan trial. In other words, despite his many protestations, he’s not really interested in proof.

Is it possible that the REAL dog that Witherington has in this Tomb fight is one that he hopes will separate his precious James Ossuary from those of the so-called Jesus Tomb, thereby giving his credibility a chance at restoration?

Let’s not be snowed under by the heroic number of dispatches that have been coming out from Witherington against Cameron & Jacobovici because he does indeed protests too much.
It comes down to this: Witherington doesn’t want us to see that he is reaping what he has sown. One phony ossuary has yielded a crop of ten.

It’s deja vu all over again for those of us who are sick of phony bone boxes being used against the Christian Faith.

]]> By: Anne http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-482 Anne Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:50:29 +0000 http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-482 If the bones were removed from the ossuaries and studied before reburial, surely they were catalogued with a minimal amount of data: sex, height, and estimated age at death, if not presence of broken bones, arthritic changes etc. where's the data? If the bones were removed from the ossuaries and studied before reburial, surely they were catalogued with a minimal amount of data: sex, height, and estimated age at death, if not presence of broken bones, arthritic changes etc. where’s the data?

]]> By: cmellon http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-590 cmellon Wed, 26 Dec 2007 16:25:50 +0000 http://jesustombhoax.com/2007/03/04/number-5-the-james-ossuary/#comment-590 It could be added as another important point to prove that James ossuary is not related to Talpiot Tomb below: During Ted Koppel's critique, 'The Lost Tomb of Jesus - A Critical Look', Koppel revealed he had denials from three people Simcha Jacobovici had misquoted in the documentary. Koppel had a written denial from the Suffolk Crime Lab Director asserting that he had NOT stated the James ossuary patina matched that of the Yeshua` ossuary. He denied ever saying they were a match, and said he'd have to do much more comparison testing of other tombs before he could draw any conclusions. Source: Wikipedia, and you can see the movie above yourself by searching at the Internet It could be added as another important point to prove that James ossuary is not related to Talpiot Tomb below:

During Ted Koppel’s critique, ‘The Lost Tomb of Jesus - A Critical Look’, Koppel revealed he had denials from three people Simcha Jacobovici had misquoted in the documentary.

Koppel had a written denial from the Suffolk Crime Lab Director asserting that he had NOT stated the James ossuary patina matched that of the Yeshua` ossuary. He denied ever saying they were a match, and said he’d have to do much more comparison testing of other tombs before he could draw any conclusions.

Source: Wikipedia, and you can see the movie above yourself by searching at the Internet

]]>