Obviously, the likelihood of encountering a family comprised of a husband named Bob, a wife named Dawn, and a son named John varies according to the number of families in the study area. If I increase the study area to a circle having a 200 mile radius centered on Wake Forest, the odds go up; if I cut the study area to a 50 mile radius, the odds go down.
Just as obviously, you need some population distribution, too. If nobody else lives within 500 miles of here, it really doesn't matter whether you use a circle with a 50 or 100 or 200 mile radius; the answer will be zero.
Is such information available about the Jerusalem of Jesus' day, and the few decades afterward when everybody else was dying off? I don't know, but I doubt it. We'll all know more after watching the documentary, but I'm guessing this is destined to end up in the "curiosities" file.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Nancy
I think - but I'm not sure - this claim may have been discredited a year or so ago, unless I'm thinking of another ossuary with a similar claim that turned out to be a hoax by an artifacts dealer.
2 - Bob Felton
You may be thinking of an ossuary with the inscription "james son of joseph brother of jesus." It's an interesting case, because the experts are divided about its authenticity; a large majority, however, believe it a fraud.
3 - Nancy
Yeah, I think you're right. Thanks for the correction.
4 - Nancy
What's their basis for figuring this is the collective family tomb of the ben Yusuf family? How did they date it, what X-tian symbols (if any) were on it, what bones found in it, etc.? Has anybody said?
I suspect those with an axe to grind will proclaim it loudly, some only to push the buttons of the religiously inclined, & those with an interest in keeping the status quo will denounce it as the work of the devil - because of course, should it be true, their source of revenue goes up in smoke, & those poor slobs caught in the middle (which is most christians) will simply ignore the whole hoo-ha & carry on as usual.
5 - zingzing
look. the statistical analysis varies... of course it does... but the most conservative estimate i've seen says that there is a 1 in 100 chance that this is NOT the family of jesus christ, should he exist as we know him in the bible. it's just the names, the parent-child relationships, the fact that the mary magdeline bones aren't related to the jesus bones, all that... all of the elements coming together like that makes it statistics your worst enemy in this case.
of course, what with the statistics, i'd have to say that it is statistically more possible that this is a hoax.
or a television show.
6 - JustOneMan
please...... this is just more crap from Hollywood...strange timing to announce a 10 year old discovery the night after the Oscars...gee what a coincidence...he should go back and work on Titanic II...he is a fucking loser
JOM
7 - jaz
the conservative estimate based on the broadest of archaological figures is 1 in 600 possibility, the broad end is more like one in a million
here is the National Geographic article. Shows who did what and how
Plenty of room there for further study since this was done for a documentary, and not as a scientific exploration. An example, they did a DNA test on "Jesus" and "Mary Magdalene"'s ossuaries and found them to not be related on the maternal side. This leads one to postulate that since it was an obvious family tomb, the only reason someone unrelated by blood would be there is due to marriage. Yet they clearly state they have not yet tested the rest of the possible samples to see if :Judah: is indeed the "son of Jesus and Mary", for example...or the DNA relationships with all those in th etomb.
This also raises the bit about the "James" ossuary mentioned earlier, which was discovered and carbon dated properly, then discounted by some experts due to the inscription...other scientists have pointed out that the discrepency could arise from the ossuary having been reused
a National Geographic article on the *James* ossuary is here.
Interesting to note, the DNA in the *James* box has yet to be tested and compared to the *Jesus* tomb findings to determine if the ossuary came form this very tomb, which would provide provenance and go a long way to making the odds that this is indeed what the film makers claim.
Plenty more, but those links should be enough to chew on.
a little Tao of D'oh.
8 - TQ
If the documentary's claim is true, why is it viewed as a such a huge threat? It seems like way too much emphasis is given to the man, and not his message. It should be the other way around. Yes???
9 - jaz
well, TQ..it's a big deal, because it would prove that Yeshua WAS a man...no more and no less
this would destroy the Myth of bodily resurrection and ascension to heaven, destroying most of the dogma that is the foundation of "christianity"
10 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I used to live near Talpiyot (I notice that nobody is saying where exactly in Talpiyot this cave is located) - which is part of the modern City of Jerusalem. It is not a suburb. When the Romans ruled here, it was not at all part of Jerusalem. It was several kilometers south of Jerusalem's city limits in the general vicinity of where the Bethlehem and Hebron Roads run.
Frankly, there are just too many names together in one spot to be a coincidence, in my opinion. But proof will have to await DNA sampling and possible examination of the skeletons in the boxes. Perhaps the skeletal examination could be undertaken remotely using a modified version of an MRI, so as to avoid the politically explosive question of opening an ossuary and physically disturbing the bones therein. I do not know how DNA samples would be obtained without opening the ossuaries themselves...
Christian symbols are not likely to be found at all. Jesus, assuming he lived at all, was born, lived, and died a Jew.
This is a Jewish ossuary.
Bear in mind that I do not believe these claims. Far more proof needs to be shown for me to consider this real (as in the Jesus who's existence has caused so many millions of Jews so much misery). But, on the other hand, it would be nice if the claims of Christianity were shown to be false at their base. It would be fitting vengeance for all the Jews who have suffered vicious persecution at the hands of Christians over the millennia if the religion was proven a fraud.
11 - DJRadiohead
Didn't I see this movie before? "Bring out your dead!"
12 - jaz
Ruvy, the bones were buried in unmarked graves after the tomb was discovered in 1980 as per Jewish tradition.
The DNA samples were taken recently from residue in the ossuaries.
13 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy: "if the religion was proven a fraud" Do you mean like all the other religions are too?
14 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Thanks,
Gonzo,D'oh,Jaz.I knew my comment would bring out the John Knox/Torquemada of atheism for a comment. I didn't think you could resist. That is your contention, Chris, not mine. As it stands, you haven't got a shred of proof behind your contentions.
When you state, "in my opinion", or "IMHO, all religions are frauds", then I won't come after you with titles. In the meantime, the shoe fits...
I know something about how to fit a shoe, BTW. My grandfather was a shoemaker.
15 - jaz
"if the religion was proven a fraud..."
now, here we get into some real meat
if it does get reasonably proven that these are indeed the ossuaries of those implicated, it does NOT really prove the entire religion a fraud....what it does is destroy some of the Myths that have grown up from the deep past of those who formed the dogma of the religion as we understand it today...
meaning the Pauline bullshit, not the basic philosophy which was taught by this rabbi under question
THAT could possibly be the radical change, demonstrating that the Pauline doctrines and everything from Nicea onward is fabricated for political purposes would give many the chance to look it all over again, and think differently about the basic Teachings themselves, and not the bullshit that has been spewed in it's name for centuries
might be too scary for some
the Tao of D'oh.
16 - jaz
sorry, was interrupted mid-comment
at any rate...it is still WAY too early in the process to make any kind of definitive determination about all of this
from what's been released so far, the findings and speculations appear to raise at least as many relevant questions as they propose to answer
so, no one should take any of the claims made by this documentary as *gospel*, but rather as a place to begin
for those Literalists out there... something to think about.
17 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Well, my boy, you are beginning to see the possibility of radical change and what it can do...
It requires a truly open mind to contemplate all this. Something too many "religious" people do not have...
18 - jaz
Ruvy, you know i have been all about the "radical" and "heretical" when it comes to much of these matters
i have kept my personal thoughts on all this to myself, but many times i've pointed out contradictions and outright errors/facts in the currently accepted dogmas
just the simple fact alone that the New Testament is what, 27 books normally? and that 21 of those are letters of dubious provenance from long after the death of Yeshua should be enough to demonstrate to most that somebody has been fooling people for a long time
i'm very interested in how this all plays out, and am flabbergasted that the folks involved in this documentary didn't pursue VERY obvious lines of investigation before bringing this production to the public
19 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy, not only are you confused about gods, you're confused about John Knox. As you can see in this article from Wikipedia, John Knox believed in the Christian god and worked to reform religion. And I've never been to Scotland either!
On the other hand, I'd like to believe there are gods but have seen no evidence whatsoever to support the idea. My contention simply says that given the paucity of evidence, blind faith, such as you so shrilly practice, is nothing but recklessness.
Ruvy, you can try and turn the rhetorical tables all you want to, but it is all in vain. You haven't got a shred of evidence, physical or spiritual, to support your conjecture as to the origins of life in the universe. You're the one making the pitch so the burden of proof lies on you; I'm simply saying no sale...
All you have are ancient stories, legends, myths and some extremely dubious inferences, but nothing substantive at all. That may persuade you it's worth all that is done in the name of god but I am nothing except seriously and sincerely appalled.
Finally, I can't resist adding this, your grandfather may have been a shoemaker but you're simply talking a load of old cobblers!
20 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"I'm very interested in how this all plays out, and am flabbergasted that the folks involved in this documentary didn't pursue VERY obvious lines of investigation before bringing this production to the public"
I can empathize. That is what you get from "secular" Jews, Israelis in particular. They do not understand what faith or belief means, so they only go after the surface issues. "Believers" like you and me (yes you are a believer, even if you dress it up in science and call yourself an agnostic and a heretic) see the real issues at stake...
21 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Sorry Chris,
I don't mean to seem to ignore you. Unfortunately, you are the one declaring in flat terms that there is nothing to faith. That is nothing more than an opinion.
I know you won't comprehend me at all, but you are one of those "religious" people I'm talking about - someone quite different from a "believer," which is what I am.
22 - jaz
::chuckles::
Ruvy - calling me any kind of "believer" is stretching it quite a bit...an example is that i have always said i was called a heretic, or that some of my views are considered heretical by the powers that be
but like the issue we are discussing in this thread, it's all about thinking and what facts are available, not about unfounded "belief"
i leave that to others who HAVE such belief, the comforts derived from any kind of *Faith* are denied to the likes of me
23 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy, let's try this one last time, r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w-l-y:- I am NOT declaring that there is nothing to faith, I am saying that nobody has ever shown any evidence for the existence of gods.
That is NOT an opinion, it's a conclusion based upon the evidence. I don't care either way whether there are gods or not, I just won't believe in your unsubstantiated claims. Show me gods exist, any gods at all, and I'll be right down to whatever holy building you like and praying like a whirling dervish.
The burden of proof lies with those making the claims, which would be you, and NOT those listening to the pitch, which would be me. Got it?
24 - zingzing
oh sigh. how many times we gonna see this same damn argument? ruvy is a religious man. a fucking nut about it. he's got nothing to prove he is right. chris is not religious. a fucking nut about it. he's got nothing to prove he is right.
it's all a crock of shit, and so is this stupid fucking documentary. jesus did not exist as he does in the bible. the bible is full of shit and lies. it's a book, written by men, nothing more.
i'm sure the fact that this is a hoax or a random chance.
and ruvy, stop blaming christianity for your problems. your problems come from the fact that you israeli jews have no respect for human life, or just can't stop arguing or something. grow the fuck up.
25 - duane
Zing, the arguments will continue as long as the arguers refuse to understand the arguments of those they are arguing with.