It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Geologist claims Jesus was married... and had a SON: Expert says he has proof son of God was buried in 'family tomb' along with wife Mary and his brother
Geologist ran 150 chemical tests on ossuaries and 'Jesus Family tomb'
Claims chemical signature proves James Ossuary was at Jerusalem site
Chalk box bears inscription ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’
Find suggests Jesus fathered a child and was married
An Israeli geologist claims he has ‘confirmed’ the existence and authenticity of a tomb belonging to Jesus and his son in Jerusalem.
After extensive chemical tests, Dr Arye Shimron says he has linked the James Ossuary – a 1st-century chalk box that some believe hold the bones of Jesus' brother – to the long disputed ‘Jesus Family tomb’ in the city’s East Talpiot neighbourhood.
The research could have enormous ramifications as it suggests that Jesus was married, fathered a child and that a physical resurrection did not take place.
According to the discovery by geoarcheologist Dr Shimron, the 'son of God' was buried with nine other people, including ‘Judah, son of Jesus’ and his wife, named Mary.
Dr Shimron’s work has renewed controversy over the Talpiot tomb, which was discovered in 1980 and dates back to the Second Temple period and the time of Jesus,The Jerusalem Post reported.
Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... aims.html#ixzz3WcrqlpQC
Probing this connection, Dr Shimron and documentary maker Simcha Jacobovici looked closer at the ossuaries, including the James Ossuary, which is held by a private owner and bears the inscription, ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’.
WHAT IS THE JAMES OSSUARY?
The James Ossuary is a first century chalk example of a box that was used to hold the bones of the dead.
But it stands out because it bears the inscription 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' on one side.
The inscription is considered significant because it may provide archaeological evidence of Jesus,
The existence of the ossuary was announced in 2002, but its authenticity was immediately challenged.
The box's owner was charged with forging part of the inscription and while he was found innocent seven years later, the judge said the acquittal 'does not mean that the inscription on the ossuary is authentic or that it was written 2,000 years ago'.
Now, Dr Shimron claims the chemical signature on the ‘crust’ of the box matches that of a tomb in Jerusalem known as the ‘Jesus Family tomb’ where other ossuaries were found bearing the names of Jesus and Mary as well as ‘Judah, son of Jesus’.
The owner of the ossuary, Oded Golan, was accused of forging the inscription shortly after its discovery by an academic from the Sorbonne in Paris, but he was later found innocent.
Other experts and archaeologists have rejected the claim that the Jerusalem tomb is connected with Jesus at all.
Recently, Dr Shimron gained access to the James Ossuary and scraped beneath the patina of the box.
He ran around 150 tests on the chemistry of the samples from 25 different ossuaries – 15 of which were from unrelated tombs – and found that traces of magnesium, iron and silicon from the James Ossuary matched the chemical signature of Talpiot tomb.
The Talpiot ossuaries were covered in a thick layer of ‘Rendzina’ soil, which is characteristic of the hills of East Jerusalem when they were found and has a unique chemistry.
Dr Shimron worked from the assumption that an earthquake of 363AD flooded the tomb with soil and mud to cover the ossuaries, effectively forming a vacuum and freezing them in time.
Soil that seeped into the box matched that found in the Talpiot ossuaries, indicating that it had lain for years alongside others in the ‘holy’ location.
Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... aims.html#ixzz3WcxuRe1O
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: theabsolutetruth
We know even from the New Testament that names like James, John, and Mary were common in that era.
If the name Jesus (in its contemporary spelling, of course) was just as common, then the discovery would not prove very much.
It would be like discovering the tomb of a "John Smith" in the western world.
I have written about the creation of the Jesus story a lot on ATS. My theory is that according to ancient artwork, there was a Mithraism scholar that stood out, his name wasn't Jesus but was translated as such.
originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t
It doesn't IMO.
I have written about the creation of the Jesus story a lot on ATS. My theory is that according to ancient artwork, there was a Mithraism scholar that stood out, his name wasn't Jesus but was translated as such. He was popular and seeing as the Roman Empire needed to garner and solidify popular opinion, they opted for a mish mash of the trending religions of the day (most stemming from more ancient cult practices) including making their main hero 'Jesus the Nazarene', which was distorted and manipulated over time, deliberately and in translation into the story we know today.
I just posted the article due to my interest in history, religion etc. It is interesting to see how things appear in MSM possibly pertaining to an agenda.