It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

tomb of james, brother of jesus

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
i seem to remember seeing this as one of those short minute long bits they use as filler on the evening news about 7 years ago where they found a tomb near either jerusalem or nazareth that said "James, brother of Jesus" on it, but that was all i heard about it, was is debunked, or was there a sudden cover up of it??

anybody remember this?




posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Yes there was a burial box (ossuary) with that inscription but there was doubt to it's validity. May have been a modern alteration to the text on the box if I remember correctly.

[edit on 9/5/2010 by kinglizard]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Fom wiki


In the November 2002 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, André Lemaire of the Sorbonne University in Paris published the report that an ossuary bearing the inscription Ya'aqov bar Yosef akhui Yeshua' ("James son of Joseph brother of Jesus") had been identified belonging to a collector, who quickly turned out to be Oded Golan. If authentic, the inscription (while not mentioning Jesus' and James' mother) would have been the first archaeological evidence that Jesus existed aside from the manuscript tradition. The ossuary was exhibited at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, Canada, late that year. But on June 18, 2003, the Israeli Antiquities Authority published a report concluding, based on an analysis of the patina, that the inscription is a modern forgery. Specifically, it appeared that the inscription had been added recently and made to look old by addition of a chalk solution. On December 29, 2004, Golan was indicted in an Israeli court along with three other men — Robert Deutsch, an inscriptions expert who teaches at Haifa University; collector Shlomo Cohen; and antiquities dealer Faiz al-Amaleh. They were accused of being part of a forgery ring that had been operating for more than 20 years. Golan denied the charges against him. According to the BBC, "when the police took Oded Golan into custody and searched his apartment they discovered a workshop with a range of tools, materials, and half finished 'antiquities'. This was evidence for an fraud of a scale far greater than they had suspected


It appears it was a forgery. A real shame too. It's these forgeries that make the beliefs of others look bad and I wish they'd stop doing these.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
How can you prove (If they ever found the tomb of James) That it was his tomb? Really now you got to see how fake it is.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by dave_welch
 


it was debunked and proven as a hoax. the same people who "unnearthed" or discovered it were also making millions off of other "religious relics" they created.

they used dated rocks, ground them up, and sprayed or coated the ossuary with it i believe.



here is the wikipedia link:
en.wikipedia.org...
Trial
On 29 December 2004, the Israeli justice ministry charged Golan, three other Israelis, and one Palestinian, with running a forgery ring that had been operating for more than twenty years. Golan was indicted in an Israeli court along with his three co-conspirators: Robert Deutsch, an epigraphy expert who has given lectures at the University of Haifa; collector Shlomo Cohen; and antiquities dealer Faiz al-Amaleh. They were accused of manufacturing numerous artifacts, including an Ivory pomegranate which had previously been generally accepted as the only proven relic from the Temple of King Solomon. Golan denied the charges.

In February, 2007, at the trial of Oded Golan, the defense produced photographs taken in Golan's home that were dated to 1976. In these photographs, the ossuary is shown on a shelf. In an enlargement, the whole inscription can be seen. The photographs were printed on 1970s photographic paper and stamped March 1976. The photo was examined by Gerald Richard, a former FBI agent and an expert for the defense. Richard testified that nothing about the photographs suggested that they were produced other than in 1976 as the stamps and paper indicated. These photographs significantly undermined the prosecution's theory that the ossuary was a recent forgery by Golan intended to be sold for profit. As Golan's attorney, Lior Beringer, explained to Haaretz, "The prosecution claims that Golan forged the inscription after the beginning of 2000. But here is a detailed report from an FBI photo lab that states that the inscription existed at least since the 70s. It is unreasonable that someone would forge an inscription like this in the 70s and suddenly decide to come out with it in 2002." [12]

By 2008, in what has been termed "one of the biggest forgery scandals ever in the history of archaeology", an Egyptian, Samah Shoukri Ghatas, had confessed to manufacturing the many items for Oded Golan.[13]

However by 2009, many of the world's top archaeological experts have testified for both the prosecution and defense. Judge Aharon Farkash, who has a degree in archaeology, has wondered aloud in court how he can determine the authenticity of the items if the professors cannot agree among themselves.[14
.


here is the wikipedia link:
en.wikipedia.org...

picture of ossuary in question:


[edit on 5-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


you cant, but then again, how can you prove anything that old right? i mean, they still haven't figured out if king arthur (or arturus, as some suggest) was real or false, and look at all the people who believe that george washington chopped down the cherry tree.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave_welch
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


you cant, but then again, how can you prove anything that old right? i mean, they still haven't figured out if king arthur (or arturus, as some suggest) was real or false, and look at all the people who believe that george washington chopped down the cherry tree.


Well then that is what I call legend. Then again I thought carries grew on bushes?
Second line



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


haha your right with the legend thing but yes, cherry's grow on trees, anyway, that was probably a joke, i was just curious if anyone knew anything about it, and frankly, it pisses me off that there are all the hoaxers... someday, something will turn out to be real, and there will be proof with high def pictures, videos and a traveling show where you can see it in person!



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave_welch
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


haha your right with the legend thing but yes, cherry's grow on trees, anyway, that was probably a joke, i was just curious if anyone knew anything about it, and frankly, it pisses me off that there are all the hoaxers... someday, something will turn out to be real, and there will be proof with high def pictures, videos and a traveling show where you can see it in person!


The best chance we got is time travel. Everyone can interpret Jesus different now. But maybe we're all wrong about what he stood for. I would rather get his word then someone else.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Is this the whole "tomb of Jesus" find? I believe that it very well could be, though for political reasons, it is being called a hoax. Think about it for a minute... If they really found Jesus' tomb, that means that the whole story given in the Christian bible would prove to be a farse, as far as the events directly after his death. Of course certain Christian powers would want this to "go away", therefore they would try and debunk it as a hoax.

With that being said, it very well could be a hoax, though you shouldn't just believe whatever the media tells us as there is motive to cover it up or cover it over as a hoax.

--airspoon



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


wait, finding the tomb of jesus wouldn't disprove the biblical story, as long as it's an empty tomb then it would aid in proving the story, however, since the tomb was donated by one of jesus' more wealthy followers, it probably wouldn't have his name in it, especially since he was only there for 3 days anyway.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by dave_welch
 


The problem was, it wasn't empty. Furthermore, it had almost his entire family to include two Marys. One his mother and one his wife (presumably). Of course, I'm talking strictly from memory here so a deatil or two might be off, though I do remember two Marys.

--airspoon



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
that's pretty interesting airspoon, lets see if anyone can find a link with info on that, i'd really like to read that because that would be pretty cool, however, mary, joseph, and james were all common names, not sure if jeshua (jesus) was though. either way, i'd like to see more about this



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by dave_welch
 


That was the whole thing, that these were very common names. That was the media's excuse to discount the find at least. However, what are the odds that a tomb would have all of those names and only those names, dated back to the same time frame as Jesus. Regardless of whether each of those names were common, odds are that there wouldn't be two families in the same area, at the same time, with the same names for each of their family members. Of course the media didn't want to touch on those odds.

Edited to add: Check out Discovery's coverage of the discovery: www.discovery.com...

Also (Just keep in mind that there is motive to cover this find up, regardless of the outcome):






--airspoon



[edit on 5-9-2010 by airspoon]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
oh your definately right there, but that doesn't make it impossible, say you live in new york city, your name is john ferrell, and your have a wife named lysa ann and a son named david. there is a decent chance that there is another family in the same city and they all have the same name, and since they didn't use last names back then, that makes the chances even better, so now you just have john, lysa, and david. see how it's getting more likely, now obviously it was a much less populated place than NYC but still, do you see the possibility, this is still pretty interesting, and although it may show that he didn't rise from the dead, it does show that he existed right? that's the thing with a 2000 year old story, the facts are gonna get a little screwy.




top topics



 
1

log in

join