Posts
I am unlikely ever to see the documentary on “Jesus’s Tomb” that is getting so much media attention over the last few days. We don’t get Discovery Channel here. So I don’t necessarily know of all the evidence the documentary will produce.
But the media angle seems already to have fixed on the “crackpot theory” category for this babe.
And rightly so. As I understand it, the essence of the claim is that the documentary’s producer is pointing to a tomb discovered in 1980 that has ossuaries bearing the names “Jesus, son of Joseph,” “Maria,” "Mariamene,” and “Judah, son of Jesus.” And it is from about the time of Jesus.
All (except for Mariamene) were common names of that place and time. Nevertheless, Cameron, the producer, has gotten a statistician to estimate that the likelihood of these names appearing together is about 600 to one against.
Of course, to be impressed by this, you must first accept Cameron’s claim that “Mariamene” is another name for Mary Magdalene; otherwise the odds are meaningless. You have to accept his contention that the name on the relevant ossuary really is “Jesus” (i.e., Yeshua), as this reading is disputed by archaeologists. You also have to discount the argument that the presence of a “son of Jesus” ought perhaps to deduct from the likelihood that this is the ben Yusef family tomb, given that there is no historical record of Jesus having a son.
Let’s leave aside all that. Even so, is that 600-to-one figure impressive? Well, that means that, if you looked at 600 tombs of the time and place, you would have a better than even chance of finding one with these names.
And how many tombs have been excavated from that time and place?
Nine hundred.
And, of course, this one was not selected at random.
You could say I'm not impressed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
For once, I agree with you. Unless something new comes up, I believe it is unlikely they found Jesus' tomb.
However, consider this: If it was 325 A.D and a dictator decided it was in his best interest to have people believe the Tomb was real, and if his empire went on to slaughter those who disagreed, then guess what? It's what the masses would believe today.
The reality is that 10s of thousands of peole worshiped Mary Magdalene as the divine femine, successor of Jesus. These cults existed much closer in time to the actual historical Jesus. What did they know that caused the various Popes to panic so much they were compelled to send Crusaders out to slaughter those who believed in her?
I would have never read the Da Vinci Code if the Pope did not try to ban it. I figured that if he was that insecure about the book, there must be some truth in it. Sure enough, within Dan Brown's fiction, there is a ton of reality. For one thing, the bible is a manifest of misogyny.
EJ:
However, consider this: If it was 325 A.D and a dictator decided it was in his best interest to have people believe the Tomb was real, and if his empire went on to slaughter those who disagreed, then guess what? It's what the masses would believe today.
SR:
That’s more or less what happened. The Roman (and Jewish) authorities persecuted the Christians fiercely up to the fourth century. Yet the cult kept growing, and quickly. If they could plausibly have done so, the authorities surely would have promoted this as Jesus’s tomb. That is strong evidence it was not—the claim was apparently too improbable for anyone of the time to buy it.
EJ:
The reality is that 10s of thousands of peole worshiped Mary Magdalene as the divine femine, successor of Jesus. These cults existed much closer in time to the actual historical Jesus. What did they know that caused the various Popes to panic so much they were compelled to send Crusaders out to slaughter those who believed in her?
SR:
Right; and that is why there is no evidence of this huge cult. Because, over a thousand years later, the Crusaders carefully wiped out all record of it. Great conspiracy theory, Jeff.
Still, one wonders how you could nevertheless know all this. Divine inspiration?
EJ:
I would have never read the Da Vinci Code if the Pope did not try to ban it.
SR:
That's odd, Jeff. The Pope never tried to ban it anywhere, nor did the Catholic Church. It presumably follows that you have not, in fact, read The Da Vinci Code.
That would explain your touching faith in it.
Steve, your God delusion has you ranting without acknowledging legitimate possibilities.
Accepted history, July 22, 1209: Pope Innocent sent crusaders into Beziers to slaughter the entire French town, population 20,000, for sheltering "heritics" who believed Mary was Jesus' concubine.
When asked about killing everyone in town, the Pope's representative responded, "Yes, kill everyone and let God sort it out." (Paraphrased)
Did the current Pope not call for a boycott on the Da Vinci Code? What I remember is that it was Christian uproar that motivated me to buy the novel.
And you are right about history. Without a time machine we can never know the true realtionship between Jesus and Marry, for instance. So, if we can't know for sure, why do you believe all that myth in the bible is true?
I forgot to mention: it's because of obscuantism that you can't fathom plausible alternatives to your dogma. How much do Sunday school children learn about the Crusades, for example? Selective teaching is a significant factor in how people are brainwashed to believe dogma.
EJ:
Accepted history, July 22, 1209: Pope Innocent sent crusaders into Beziers to slaughter the entire French town, population 20,000, for sheltering "heritics" who believed Mary was Jesus' concubine.
SR:
You have that wrong, Jeff. The heretics of Beziers were Cathars, roughly, Manichean dualists. It wasn’t about Mary Magdalene.
EJ:
When asked about killing everyone in town, the Pope's representative responded, "Yes, kill everyone and let God sort it out." (Paraphrased)
SR:
As noted previously, killing all inhabitants of a fiercely defended town was close to standard practice in those days, and defensible (or not) on the same basis as the bombing of Dresden or Hiroshima.
EJ:
Did the current Pope not call for a boycott on the Da Vinci Code?
SR:
As previously noted, he did not. Had he, a boycott is not a ban.
EJ:
And you are right about history. Without a time machine we can never know the true realtionship between Jesus and Marry, for instance. So, if we can't know for sure, why do you believe all that myth in the bible is true?
SR:
Because, although we can never be certain, there are conclusions supported by the available evidence, and conclusions not supported or even contradicted by the available evidence.
My source re the massacre at Beziers comes from U.S. News, "Women of the Bible."
You have the audacity to talk about "evidence" when reffering to the bible? Come on Steve, Rome was not built in a day, let alone the Earth. No serious historian takes the bible as literal. You close your eyes to evidence and believe what you want, what you are told to believe by the church.
BUT. It's not your fault. You have been brainwashed. Still, there's a chance you might see the truth.
EJ:
My source re the massacre at Beziers comes from U.S. News, "Women of the Bible."
SR:
Without access to it, it is impossible to evaluate your source. I can’t say whether you got it wrong, or they did. But you must know US News and World Report is not a good authority on Medieval history?
EJ:
You have the audacity to talk about "evidence" when reffering to the bible? Come on Steve, Rome was not built in a day, let alone the Earth. No serious historian takes the bible as literal. You close your eyes to evidence and believe what you want, what you are told to believe by the church.
SR:
You are still confusing “true” with “literal.”
There are sources other than the Bible for knowledge of ancient history: not just other contemporary writings, but the archeological evidence.
Exactly! So, you admit the interpretaion of the Bible is arbitrary when you say you believe some of the Bible, but not all.
What thin ice! No wonder religion has been the cause of so much war and terrorism when anyone can take this or that from the biblical text as real or false and charge out to kill innocent people based on their personal interrpratations.
The US text I quoted comes from experts in the field.
Exactly! So, you admit the interpretaion of the Bible is arbitrary when you say you believe some of the Bible, but not all.
What thin ice! No wonder religion has been the cause of so much war and terrorism when anyone can take this or that from the biblical text as real or false and charge out to kill innocent people based on their personal interrpratations.
The US text I quoted comes from experts in the field.
EJ:
Exactly! So, you admit the interpretaion of the Bible is arbitrary when you say you believe some of the Bible, but not all.
SR:
Jeff, this is pure hallucination on your part. Let’s hope your next one doesn’t tell you to murder your wife.
EJ:
The US text I quoted comes from experts in the field.
SR:
Odd; you didn’t quote anything.
Did you or did you not say that you did not believe in creationalism as depicted in Genesis? I remember you saing you din't take all of the bible literally like the Evangelists.
And I did quote "Women of the Bible," from U.S News.
The article, written by Richard Covington, was called, "A Long Miscast Outcast: Mary Magdalene was none of the things a Pope claimed."
And your snide remake about me hallucinating only proves my point further: my wife would be perfectly safe because I don't believe in the god delusion.
Post a Comment