Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN: Archaeologists Report 1st Direct Evidence of Jesus
Oct. 21, 2002 | CNN

Posted on 10/21/2002 9:04:51 AM PDT by jern

BREAKING: Archaeologists Report 1st Direct Evidence of Jesus


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: biblicalarcheology; bones; boxofbones; epigraphyandlanguage; faithandphilosophy; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; gospelofjesuswife; hewasarabbi; james; jamescameron; jamesossuary; jesus; jesustomb; karenking; letshavejerusalem; losttombofjesus; mariame; mariamne; marymagdalene; ossuary; rabbismarry; sectarianturmoil; simchajacobovici; talpiot; talpiottomb; weddingatcana
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-354 next last

1 posted on 10/21/2002 9:04:51 AM PDT by jern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jern
A fossilized electric shaver?
2 posted on 10/21/2002 9:06:38 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern
What's the evidence?
3 posted on 10/21/2002 9:08:11 AM PDT by nmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern; Dataman; Buggman; Caleb1411; OrthodoxPresbyterian
For the record, I reject the premise. No evidence nor objective scientific premise requries the rejection of the Four Gospels, plus other NT allusions, as "firsthand evidence."

Dan
How to Make Your Very Own Jesus

4 posted on 10/21/2002 9:08:20 AM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern
I've gone out to the CNN website and they've got nothing. You've got no link. Give us something!
5 posted on 10/21/2002 9:16:26 AM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
For the record, I reject the premise.

I do, too. However, one commonly hears that there are no contemporary non-Christian refrences to Jesus, and some folks consider that to be proof that Jesus was fictional.

IF this story is true, then that line of argument dries up and blows away. Of course, then the topic shifts to whether this actual human, Jesus, was actually God.

6 posted on 10/21/2002 9:22:23 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jern
OK. Where's the direct evidence? Please provide links to posts like this!

pris0ner6

7 posted on 10/21/2002 9:22:37 AM PDT by prisoner6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Junior
A search on the http://news.google.com for "Jesus" brings back this:

http://www.startribune.com/stories/614/3378837.html

Newly discovered inscription about Jesus written in A.D. 63, scholar claims

Associated Press

Published Oct 21, 2002 JESU22

WASHINGTON -- An inscription on a burial artifact that was recently discovered in Israel appears to provide the oldest archaeological evidence of Jesus Christ, according to an expert who dates it to three decades after the crucifixion.

Writing in Biblical Archaeology Review, Andre Lemaire, a specialist in ancient inscriptions at France's Practical School of High Studies, says it is very probable the find is an authentic reference to Jesus of Nazareth.

The archaeology magazine planned to announce the discovery at a news conference today.

That Jesus existed is not doubted by scholars, but what the world knows about him comes almost entirely from the New Testament. No physical artifact from the first century related to Jesus has been discovered and verified. Lemaire believes that has changed, though questions remain, such as where the piece with the inscription has been for more than 19 centuries.

The inscription, in the Aramaic language, appears on an empty ossuary, or limestone burial box for bones. It reads: ``James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.'' Lemaire dates the object to 63 A.D.

Lemaire says the writing style, and the fact that Jews practiced ossuary burials only between 20 B.C. and A.D. 70, puts the inscription squarely in the time of Jesus and James, who led the early church in Jerusalem.

All three names were commonplace, but he estimates that only 20 Jameses in Jerusalem during that era would have had a father named Joseph and a brother named Jesus.

Moreover, naming the brother as well as the father on an ossuary was ``very unusual,'' Lemaire says. There's only one other known example in Aramaic. Thus, this particular Jesus must have had some unusual role or fame - and Jesus of Nazareth certainly qualified, Lemaire concludes.

It's impossible, however, to prove absolutely that the Jesus named on the box was Jesus of Nazareth.

The archaeology magazine says two scientists with the Israeli government's Geological Survey conducted a detailed microscopic examination of the surface patina and the inscription. They reported last month that there is ``no evidence that might detract from the authenticity.''

The ossuary's owner also is requiring Lemaire to shield his identity, so the box's current location was not revealed.

James is depicted as Jesus' brother in the Gospels and head of the Jerusalem church in the Book of Acts and Paul's epistles.

The first century Jewish historian Josephus recorded that ``the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, James by name,'' was stoned to death as a Jewish heretic in A.D. 62. If his bones were placed in an ossuary that would have occurred the following year, dating the inscription around A.D. 63.

The Rev. Joseph Fitzmyer, a Bible professor at Catholic University who studied photos of the box, agrees with Lemaire that the writing style ``fits perfectly'' with other first century examples and admits the joint appearance of these three famous names is ``striking.''

``But the big problem is, you have to show me the Jesus in this text is Jesus of Nazareth, and nobody can show that,'' Fitzmyer says.

The owner of the ossuary never realized its potential importance until Lemaire examined it last spring. Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, himself saw the box Sept. 25.

Lemaire told The Associated Press the owner wants anonymity to avoid time-consuming contacts with reporters and religious figures. The owner also wants to avoid the cost of insurance and guarding the artifact, and has no plans to display it publicly, he said.
8 posted on 10/21/2002 9:22:58 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Junior
I saw it too but did not have volume up and saw the text at bottOm as leon harris talked...I been searching for more past 20 minutes..INTERSTING INDEED !!! EVEN THOUGH I NEED NO PROOF :)
9 posted on 10/21/2002 9:24:45 AM PDT by ElisabethInCincy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jern
Yeah, I saw that. Turns out that Jesus lives in Puerto Rico. Come to think of it, I know a couple of them, maybe he's a Cuban?

Hmmm, who knows, but here is more evidence:


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS PUERTO RICAN
His first name was Jesus
He was bilingual
He was always being harassed by the authorities

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS BLACK
He called everybody "brother"
He liked Gospel
He couldn't get a fair trial

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS JEWISH
He went into his father's business
He lived at home until he was 33
He was sure his Mother was a virgin, and his Mother was
sure he was God

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS ITALIAN
He talked with his hands
He had wine with every meal
He worked in the building trades

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS A CALIFORNIAN
He never cut his hair
He walked around barefoot
He started a new religion

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS IRISH
He never got married
He was always telling stories
He loved green pastures

(and now the MOST Compelling EVIDENCE:)

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS A WOMAN
He had to feed a crowd, at a moments notice, when there was no food.
He kept trying to get the message across to a bunch of men who just didn't get it.
Even when he was dead, he had to get up because there was more work for him to do. 

10 posted on 10/21/2002 9:24:59 AM PDT by Paradox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
An expert on ancient inscriptions is claiming that the wording on a first-century burial box -- ``James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus'' -- refers to Jesus of Nazareth.

If the artifact is authentic, it raises two questions: Who was James? And did Jesus have a brother and other siblings?

The Gospels call James the ``brother'' of Jesus, and other New Testament books say he later led the Jerusalem church.

The second question is trickier and involves a three-sided church debate.

Protestants traditionally read the New Testament as meaning Mary gave birth to Jesus as a virgin and then had James, three other sons and at least two daughters with Joseph.

In accord with church fathers writing after the New Testament era, the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics teach Mary's ``perpetual virginity,'' which means she and Joseph never had marital relations.

The Orthodox think Joseph had James by his first wife, and after she died he married Mary -- whose only child was the virgin-born Jesus. Thus, James was Jesus' stepbrother.

Catholics commonly hold that James was merely Jesus' close relative, perhaps the son of Joseph's brother Clopas or a cousin on Mary's side. The new inscription, if authentic, would rule out that option.

11 posted on 10/21/2002 9:26:24 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
I'm not the most religious guy in the world, but I really liked that link to making your very own Jesus.
12 posted on 10/21/2002 9:26:52 AM PDT by Shenandoah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Junior
It's showing on their broadcast...
13 posted on 10/21/2002 9:27:24 AM PDT by Dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jern
Maybe they're talking about Jesus Mendez.
14 posted on 10/21/2002 9:29:44 AM PDT by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
'How to Make Your Very Own Jesus'

Liked your Site Dan! Very Funny - Great place to send people when they refuse to listen to fact, logic, reason or historical record.

Interesting story on James' ossuary. Wonder what will happen if indeed it continues to bear witness to the further verification of the Biblical record. For me, I need none :)
15 posted on 10/21/2002 9:29:45 AM PDT by txzman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
I agree with the Protestants, I think James was Jesus' son, and I think he had other brothers and sisters. The Roman Catholics don't believe this because then it would mean that Mary is just like any other woman, and not a "holy perpetual virgin" that they can worship.
16 posted on 10/21/2002 9:30:43 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
I am always touched by the way Jesus is portrayed in the gospel of John. No figure of myth ever had the weakness, which requires compassion (from us) or had the compassion, how he related to those around him, which he showed.
17 posted on 10/21/2002 9:32:51 AM PDT by M. T. Cicero II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
I agree with the Protestants, I think James was Jesus' son,.....

Please let me know what Protestants believe this!!!!!

18 posted on 10/21/2002 9:33:14 AM PDT by texson66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: texson66
HEHE LOL MAJOR TYPO

I ment James is Jesus' brother.
19 posted on 10/21/2002 9:34:33 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
I agree with the Protestants, I think James was Jesus' son, and I think he had other brothers and sisters. The Roman Catholics don't believe this because then it would mean that Mary is just like any other woman, and not a "holy perpetual virgin" that they can worship.

Mary is not worshipped, as she is not divine. She is venerated.

Whether step-brother or cousin to Jesus, it doesn't matter. James was a close relative. He was from the same house. Mary did not birth him. We do know from scripture that Jesus came from a large family where all relatives were considered brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles. Exact geneology doesn't matter.
20 posted on 10/21/2002 9:34:59 AM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Junior; prisoner6
they flashed it across the bottom of the screen as a News Alert during the sniper coverage....
21 posted on 10/21/2002 9:35:49 AM PDT by jern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ElisabethInCincy
One may not need proof, but it's still pretty exciting when proof appears.
22 posted on 10/21/2002 9:36:35 AM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
< I agree with the Protestants, I think that James was Jesus' son...>

You do mean Joseph's son correct?... James was Jesus' half-brother via Mary.
23 posted on 10/21/2002 9:36:40 AM PDT by CAPTAINSUPERMARVELMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Impressive post, sir.
24 posted on 10/21/2002 9:37:27 AM PDT by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
To require "firsthand evidence" of an event that occurred 2000 years ago goes far beyond what authorites require for other antiquities. Do you believe Homer wrote the Iliad? Do you believe Herodotus wrote the Histories? Do you reqlize there is FAR MORE evidence that Jesus lived for either of the above. Would you agree that there is firsthand evidence that the Gospels existed and every word of the New Testament as well by 326 A.D.?

Of course you would, because you realize that there are a dozen parchment Codex copies extant. So for these documents to have existed 300 years later, there HAD to be some antecedent activity that led to their production. The fact that these documents still exist and are identical to the current copies of the Bible, and that earlier documents have been found which are identical with portions of the codex bear "firsthand evidence" that you require. When Luke writes "We SAW these things" you are GIVEN firsthand evidence. His claims have been the same in all of the above documents. Hence, YOU ARE GIVEN FIRSTHAND EVIDENCE. If you wish to deny it, that is your perogative, but what you have is "firsthand evidence."
25 posted on 10/21/2002 9:37:56 AM PDT by wastoute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CAPTAINSUPERMARVELMAN
Yes that is what I meant, I made note of my TYPO on Post #19
26 posted on 10/21/2002 9:38:03 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Junior
AMEN JUNIOR !!!!! :))))
27 posted on 10/21/2002 9:40:00 AM PDT by ElisabethInCincy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Vic3O3
Ping
28 posted on 10/21/2002 9:40:03 AM PDT by dd5339
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jern
I have all the evidence I need. The BIBLE !!
29 posted on 10/21/2002 9:40:21 AM PDT by Dustbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Mary did not birth him.

How do you know?

30 posted on 10/21/2002 9:40:48 AM PDT by Lyford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dustbunny
AMEN Dustbunny!!!
31 posted on 10/21/2002 9:41:00 AM PDT by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
The inscription, in the Aramaic language, appears on an empty ossuary, or limestone burial box for bones. It reads: ``James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.''

Yep, and the cave was empty too, proof that Jesus didn't exist. What, do you think a dead guy just got up and walked away?

Oh. Never mind...

32 posted on 10/21/2002 9:45:36 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
I was about to point that one out. :-)But how many times do Catholics have to point out that they don't WORSHIP Mary. They VENERATE her; in other words, they honor her, for accepting God's will for her, which was to be the Theotokos, the Mother of God. This is also true of Orthodox Christians.

People often forget two things concerning Scripture. It was written in ANOTHER language (in this case, Greek). The word used by the Gospel writers that has been translate as "brother" meant close relative too. Also, there are MANY ways that someone can be your brother. Literally, one can be a brother if you have the same parents, or if you only have ONE parent in common. Tradition (I know, it's not in the canon of the New Testament that was set by the Eastern and Western Churches several centuries after Christ's life) states that Joseph was probably much older than Mary when she was betrothed to him, and quite possibly, he was married once before. This is what, as someone state before, the Orthodox Churches hold (apparently). This view has certain merit, in my opinion. What Scripture appears to say due to translation doesn't give the entire picture.

Using it to vouch for a certain viewpoint that is in antithesis to another (Mary had other children vs. Mary was a "perpetual virgin") will always show bias to one or the other viewpoint. We can never be ABSOLUTELY sure, because Scripture itself isn't entirely clear on this, so as long as we don't have conclusive proof of what happened, we can't say conclusively. All we can rely on is faith, and who argues the best argument (in their each individual opinion).

33 posted on 10/21/2002 9:45:40 AM PDT by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wastoute
If you wish to deny it, that is your perogative, but what you have is "firsthand evidence."

You're misreading far too much into my post. I suggest you go back and read it for comprehension.

34 posted on 10/21/2002 9:45:44 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jern
They found his wallet?
35 posted on 10/21/2002 9:46:03 AM PDT by doctor noe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Exact geneology doesn't matter.

How conveeeenient.

36 posted on 10/21/2002 9:46:52 AM PDT by Thinkin' Gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jern
And if Jesus didn't exist then how could Ted Turner hate him? Something for CNN to ponder.
37 posted on 10/21/2002 9:46:59 AM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jern
The history channel said he was just a right wing radical anyway.
If they found evidence, they'll claim he's responsible for the evil Christian right wing we have today. LOL
He was an "oppressive" leader. He taught people should learn to fish, rather than get fish welfare.
He was an evil gun owner of his day. He taught that if you didn't have a sword - sell your cloak and buy one.
He was a moral "bigot". "Intolerant" of homosexuals, whores, and other Satanic lifestyles of the left. He loved them enough to try to change them, though.
He was anti-abortion. He said if anyone hurts a little one, it would be better to have a millstone tied around their neck and be thrown into the sea.
Yep. He was a right wing radical. I'm sure the left will be right there to demonize his remains. LOL
38 posted on 10/21/2002 9:47:09 AM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Exact geneology doesn't matter.

That's mighty convenient.....

39 posted on 10/21/2002 9:47:29 AM PDT by ksen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: texson66
"'I agree with the Protestants, I think James was Jesus' son,...'
"Please let me know what Protestants believe this!!!!! "

As a matter of fact, the Cathars of southern France believed that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and had children, one of whom was a boy named James.

40 posted on 10/21/2002 9:49:15 AM PDT by Fabozz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Impressive post, sir.

I can't take credit. It's something I found and had in my clipboard while FR was having its temper tantrum. It's from the AP, but I had long since lost the link from where I copied it.

I should have made that clear when I posted it. Sorry.

41 posted on 10/21/2002 9:49:28 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jern
I apologize in advance for my comment which may seem esoteric, but here goes:

One of the underlying assumptions of the CNN report is that the only sort of evidence that is considered "hard" evidence is "stuff" such as buildings and (in this case) an ossuary.

Once again, literary documents from the ancient world are not given equal merit. And I am not referring here to the text of the New Testament and the oldest papyri that give evidence of it. Rather, I am referring to the two passages in Josephus (ca. 37--100 AD) that mention Jesus. The first one mentions this James the brother of Jesus by name. And the second one summarizes the ministry of Jesus. Most scholars consider that second text in Josephus to have been emended by Christians, but nevertheless there is a core text that goes back to Josephus. So my point is that, for those who are interested in such things, there already existed "direct evidence for Jesus."

42 posted on 10/21/2002 9:49:53 AM PDT by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
ya scared me for a second there man..I thought you were one of those bloodline of the holy grail folks....which is a weird read in itself.
43 posted on 10/21/2002 9:51:00 AM PDT by Delbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Thinkin' Gal
Hehheh, I promise I didn't read your #36 before I wrote my #39. ;^)

Your's is much better. ;^)

44 posted on 10/21/2002 9:51:28 AM PDT by ksen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jern
The first century Jewish historian Josephus recorded that ``the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, James by name,'' was stoned to death as a Jewish heretic in A.D. 62. If his bones were placed in an ossuary that would have occurred the following year, dating the inscription around A.D. 63.

This is not the only reference to Jesus in Josephus' works. A non christian, Josephus also referred to Jesus directly as being a teacher from Nazareth who performed many miracles.

45 posted on 10/21/2002 9:51:58 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Here we go again...Another Mary never had babies after Jesus thread....
46 posted on 10/21/2002 9:53:23 AM PDT by Delbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ksen; Thinkin' Gal
Look, I know the whole Mary argument is a favorite among the doubters (even though it was settled before 500 A.D. SOmebody else objected using exactly the same arguments.), but simply, in those days, and today in families like mine, a relative is a relative is a relative. They came from the same house. James was from the same house, either a cousin or a step-brother. Either way, it doesn't matter. They were raised together, probably as brothers.

There is no mention, to my knowledge, that Mary ever birthed more children. There are mention of brothers and sisters, but it's understood, as far as I know, that they were step-sibs and cousins. This info come from at least 1000 years before the 16th century revolters.
47 posted on 10/21/2002 9:56:25 AM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Mary did not birth him.

I'm Baptist. We believe Mary was just a vessel chosen to carry the blessed child. A womb, but that's all. After his birth, she proceeded with her normal wifely duties. She was born into sin like any other woman. Why shouldn't she service her husband like other wives?

48 posted on 10/21/2002 9:56:54 AM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Junior
One may not need proof, but it's still pretty exciting when proof appears. <----My sentiments exactly..Biblical Archaeology is fascinating...I dont need it, but I sure do like it.
49 posted on 10/21/2002 9:57:33 AM PDT by Delbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Delbert
See post 47.

This was all thrashed out a long time ago.
50 posted on 10/21/2002 9:58:49 AM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-354 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson