Israel Scholars Say Biblical Burial Box Is Genuine

AP via Church News ^ | 6/29/11

[marshmallow]

JERUSALEM -- Israeli scholars say they have confirmed the authenticity of a 2,000-year-old burial box bearing the name of a relative of the high priest Caiaphas of the New Testament.

The ossuary bears an inscription with the name "Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiaphas, priest of Maaziah from Beth Imri."

An ossuary is a stone chest used to store bones. Caiaphas was a temple priest and an adversary of Jesus who played a key role in his crucifixion.

The Israel Antiquities Authority says the ossuary was seized from tomb robbers three years ago and has since been undergoing analysis. Forgery is common in the world of biblical artifacts.

[RIghtwardHo]

I love this stuff (archeology) and can’t get enough.

That’s so very cool.

[exit82]

SC—one for your GGG files.

[dangus]

One of the tomb robbers pled for forgiveness, saying “Ossouary sorry, souary, uary sorry”

[kenavi]

Let’s make no bones about it.

[Jeff F]

Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiaphas, priest of Maaziah from Beth Imri

So according to the article's translation, Caiaphas' son was "Yeshua". That is one transcription of the name Jesus. Weird. Probably just a sloppy job of reporting and/or translating.

[newheart]

It would be interesting to know if Caiaphas’ son was born before or after the confrontation. If he was born afterwards, it would be hard to imagine Caiaphas naming his son after the Nazarene he so opposed unless he had a change of heart at some point.

And in Acts 4, you almost get the sense that Caiaphas had softened a little. Otherwise he might have had Peter and John executed as well.

Still the simplest explanation is that the kid was born before and they just named him a name that was quite common at the time. (Friends probably called him Josh.) And by “coincidence” it was also Jesus’ name.

Think about Caiaphas ordering the trial of someone with the same name as his son, whose major crime in the eyes of the priests was that he equated himself with his father, God. I can see a lot of serious internal conflict for the guy.

[newheart]

Weird. Probably just a sloppy job of reporting and/or translating.

Not weird at all. Jesus (Yeshua/Joshua) was a very common name at the time. But it does strike me as one of God's little intentional "coincidences."

[EQAndyBuzz]

“Weird. Probably just a sloppy job of reporting and/or translating. “

If you trace the lineage back, the writer was probably a relative of Joe Klein.

[wideawake]

Common name in those days indeed, just as Miriam (Mary) was.

The erroneous assumption that the name was somehow unique helped sell the whole James hoax a few years back.

[newheart]

Exactly.

[Drawsing]

In the Old Testament “Yeshua” was translated as “Joshua”. In the New Testament it is translated into its Greek form as “Jesus”. And yes, it was and is a common name.

[count-your-change]

It will be recognized as genuine until it’s recognized as fake.

[brent13a]

Not weird at all. Jesus (Yeshua/Joshua) was a very common name at the time. But it does strike me as one of God's little intentional "coincidences."

It is a sloppy job of transcription though, as there is no such name in Hebrew as "Yeshua". It only ever was Yehoshua, which has been transcribed to english as Joshua. If you look at the Strong's Geek Lexicons it says in black & white that Ieosus is a transcription of Hebrew Joshua and that the name of the christian 'Jesus' was originally and always the Hebrew name "Joshua" (Yehoshua). "Yeshua" is a made up nonsensical transcription just like "Jesus" that means nothing. In Aramaic "Joshua" is sometimes shortened to "Y'shua" but that is no different than "Yehoshua". The prophet in Tanakh is Yehoshua (Joshua), his name and the name everyone references were the same. Yehoshua should be the name people reference instead of the nonsensical name "Jesus".....but how can anyone deprogram themselves from 2000 years of church myths and propoganda?

So if the ossuary actually says Yeshua then that would be a first because all of my research has shown that in Hebrew that name has never actually existed. The closest it has is in the Talmud where the jewish rabbis wrote a lie about a person namedYeshu in an attempt to discredit the life of Yehoshua (jesus).

[newheart]

Interesting comment. Thanks.

Perhaps the transcription problem was with the stone carver. A misspelling? I don’t know how solid spelling conventions were then, I can only guess that Hebrew was pretty fixed thanks to the Torah, Greek less fixed, and Aramaic even less. Again, just a guess.

But I do know that in most other languages it was centuries before standardized spelling appeared, taking shape in Gutenberg’s wake. And even that remains in flux, although at a slower pace than previously. (With the exception of the somewhat disturbing impact of texting and instant messaging.)

[Mount Athos]

>It is a sloppy job of transcription though, as there is no such name in Hebrew as “Yeshua”. It only ever was Yehoshua

Wrong, the name Yeshua is found commonly in the Hebrew bible. Take you 10 seconds to look up Neh. 8:17 and see Yeshua. Yeshua is the short form of the name Yehoshua, like using Bill for William.

[rmlew]

So according to the article's translation, Caiaphas' son was "Yeshua". That is one transcription of the name Jesus. Weird. Probably just a sloppy job of reporting and/or translating.

Not really. Yeshua/Yeshu/Yehoshua or Joshua was a common name. Same for Miriam. Herod the Great (or as I think of him, the half-Edomite, half Nabatean Roman imposed dictator) had two wives named Miriam. And lots of people in Christians scriptures had teh same Hebrew first name. Three of the apostles are named Yehuda/Judah/Judas (Iscariot, Thaddeus, and Thomas).

[SunkenCiv]

GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach	join list or digest view topics view or post blog bookmark post a topic subscribe
Thanks exit82. Missed your ping on the way through, was going to post something about this, figured I'd better do a search, and voilá! Note: this topic is from 6/29/11. Blast from the Past. 2,000-Year-Old Priestly Burial Box Is Real, Archaeologists Say To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.

[exit82]

No problem, SC.

Thanks for keeping the GGG list—it is getting to be quite a resource of reference material.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks for the kind remarks!