Artifact May Be Earliest Relating to Existence of Jesus

[Azat]

By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD

 

An inscription in stone, found in or near Jerusalem and written in a language and script of 2,000 years ago, bears the words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus."

 

This could well be the earliest artifact ever found relating to the existence of Jesus, a French scholar has concluded in an analysis of the inscription being published this week in the magazine Biblical Archaeology Review.

 

If the inscription is authentic and indeed refers to Jesus of Nazareth, it would be the earliest known documentation of Jesus outside the Bible. The magazine, which announced the find yesterday, is promoting it as "the first-ever archaeological discovery to corroborate biblical references to Jesus."

 

Other scholars are reacting with caution, calling the find important and tantalizing but saying it will probably be impossible to confirm a definite link between the inscription and any of the central figures in the founding of Christianity.

 

Fraud cannot be ruled out, they said, though the cursive style of the script and a microscopic examination of the etched surface seemed to diminish suspicions. An investigation by the Geological Survey of Israel found no evidence of modern pigments, scratches by modern cutting tools or other signs of tampering.

 

Radiocarbon dating was impossible because no organic material was found with the inscription. But the words were carved on a 20-inch-long limestone burial box, similar to ones the Jews used only in the first centuries B.C. and A.D. More specifically, the scholar said, the style of the script and the forms of certain words placed the date of the inscription to the last decades before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

 

Biblical scholars said in interviews that the circumstantial evidence supporting a link to Jesus was possibly strong, but circumstantial nonetheless.

 

Although James (Jacob or Ya'akov), Joseph (Yosef) and Jesus (Yeshua) were common names of that time and place, several scholars noted, it would have been highly unusual to have them appear in the combination and kinship order found in the inscription. The words, in Aramaic, "Ya'akov bar Yosef akhui diYeshua," were carved on a burial box, known as an ossuary, which presumably once held the bones of a man named James who died in the first century A.D.

 

Several times the New Testament mentions that Jesus had a brother named James, who became leader of the nascent Christian community in Jerusalem after the crucifixion. And the first-century Jewish historian Josephus recorded that James was executed by stoning around A.D. 63.

 

The James whose name is on the stone could have been one of many Jameses. But the rest of the inscription significantly narrows the possibilities. First, in the common practice, his father is identified, in this case as a Joseph.

 

Rarely, though, would a brother of the deceased have been added to the inscription, unless the brother was prominent. James the apostle might have wanted to proclaim one last time his kinship with Jesus.

 

Dr. André Lemaire, a researcher at the Sorbonne in Paris and a respected specialist on inscriptions of the biblical period, calculated the statistical probability of the three names' occurring in such a combination as extremely slim. Probably over two generations in first-century Jerusalem, no more than 20 people could have been called "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus," and few of them might have been buried in inscribed ossuaries. Other calculations yield an even lower probability.

 

"It seems very probable that this is the ossuary of the James in the New Testament," Dr. Lemaire wrote in the magazine article. "If so, this would also mean that we have here the first epigraphic mention — from about A.D. 63 — of Jesus of Nazareth."

 

But elsewhere in his article, he acknowledged that "nothing in this ossuary inscription clearly confirms the identification" of this James as the one known in Christian tradition.

 

Christians have three different interpretations regarding the kinship of James to Jesus, Dr. Lemaire noted.

 

Protestants generally read the New Testament to mean that James was the son of Joseph and Mary; in this case, Mary presumably gave birth to Jesus as a virgin and then had James and other children. A second interpretation, dominant in the Eastern Orthodox Church, regards James as a son of Joseph by a previous marriage. Roman Catholics tend to regard the word "brother" to mean any close relative; perhaps James was a cousin, the son of Joseph's brother, which would accord with teachings of Mary's "perpetual virginity."

 

Before this, Biblical Archaeology Review reported, the earliest mention of Jesus was in a piece of papyrus containing a fragment of the Gospel by John, written in Greek in about A.D. 125. Most of the existing early texts for the New Testament date from 300 or more years after the time of Jesus. The earliest Gospel to be written, by Mark, is thought to have been composed around the year 70.

 

Only a few other ancient artifacts mention New Testament figures. In 1990, the ossuary of Caiaphas, the high priest who turned Jesus over to the Romans, was uncovered. Even earlier, archaeologists discovered an inscription on a monument that bears the name of Pontius Pilate.

 

Like other biblical scholars, Dr. James C. VanderKam of the University of Notre Dame praised Dr. Lemaire as an authoritative epigrapher, or specialist in ancient inscriptions, whose research is thorough and evaluations judicious.

 

"Since the research comes from André Lemaire, I take it very seriously," Dr. VanderKam said. "If it is authentic, and it looks like it is, this is helpful nonbiblical confirmation of the existence of this man James."

 

Dr. Eric M. Meyers, an archaeologist and director of the graduate program in religion at Duke University, said the rarity of this configuration of names occurring, especially the inclusion of a brother's name, "lends a sense of credibility to the claim."

 

But Dr. Meyers questioned whether the discovery, if it does refer to Jesus Christ, will "tell us anything we didn't already know." He and other scholars agreed that Jesus as a historical figure has long been well established.

 

Dr. Joseph Fitzmyer , professor emeritus of New Testament studies at Catholic University in Washington, hailed it as a significant discovery if it does indeed refer to Jesus of Nazareth. "That would be a new extrabiblical attestation of his existence, and there are so few extrabiblical things that do," he said.

 

Still, Dr. Fitzmyer said he had serious doubts that the third name on the inscription actually referred to Jesus of Nazareth.

 

"My reaction is, it's possible, but I hesitate to say probable," he said. "I don't see how anybody can say any more."

 

How the ossuary was discovered is part of the problem, scholars said. It somehow fell into the hands of looters, who then turned a profit selling it on the antiquities market. Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, said the ossuary was now owned by an unidentified collector in Jerusalem.

 

Because the ossuary did not come from a controlled excavation, where archaeologists plot every detail and possible clue to a discovery's context, scholars said they despaired of ever knowing the inscription's meaning beyond doubt.

 

"This could be something genuinely important, but we can never know for certain," said Dr. P. Kyle McCarter Jr., a professor of biblical and Near Eastern studies at Johns Hopkins University. "Not knowing the context of where the ossuary was found compromises anything we might say, and so doubts are going to persist."

 

A few scholars criticized the magazine for publishing an article based on research involving looted goods, arguing that this encouraged unethical practices in the antiquities market. The Discovery Channel announced it planned a television documentary next spring on the scientific testing of the so-called James ossuary.

 

Ossuaries were used in the two-burial practice that was standard among Jews in the first century. When a person died, the body was first laid out in a burial cave for about a year. After the flesh decayed, the bones were then gathered and placed in a limestone box, an ossuary. The one in question was unadorned, except for the inscription of 20 Aramaic letters etched on one side.

 

In the article, Dr. Lemaire concedes that no one knows whether Christians at the time continued the Jewish two-burial custom. He said the shapes of three of the letters in the script indicated that the burial occurred shortly before the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70.

 

In the immediately preceding years, Dr. Meyers of Duke said, it was possible that the nascent Christian community in Jerusalem might still have been following certain traditional Jewish practices because "they were just beginning to articulate the differences between Christianity and Judaism."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/21/science/...&partner=GOOGLE

[Sip]

Wait a minute ... suppose it is real ... wouldn't it be even MORE shocking to realize Jesus had a brother named James?

 

This is the first I have EVER heard of such a thing so either I am completely "out of it", or this story is a bit "whack" as they say!!! They say James is several times mentioned in the new testament, but I have never heard his name mentioned on the religion channel (nor any movies).

 

James Christ, I can't believe this ...

 

.

 

[ October 22, 2002, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: Sip ]

[khodja]

Sip,

 

There was an extensive discussion about this subject in this forum and in the other Armenian forum. I was called every derogatory name in the book by the traditional Armenians here. Yes, Jesus had a brother, an identical twin called the didymus (the twin). He was also called James the Just. Don't dig too much further or you may find the things I found out and then you will be banished from the Armenian race. Surprise, Surprise, Jesus even had a nuclear family and his descendants are sitting in castles all over Europe. A few hundred years ago one could be burned at the stake for revealing this, courtesy of the same fellows who are now claiming that they never sodomized little altar boys.

[Sip]

I am just absolutely speechless!!! So I wonder ... what else don't I know?

 

So it was in this forum too, eh? Ok, I won't dig at all

[khodja]

Sip,

 

You are not young enough to know everything!

[joseph]

Hagarag you lucky , you should thank God that you are born in a deferent time , by the way I have one question did they make them sit on the stick before they burn them or just tie them to it , just kiding Hagarag , I dont know why I cant help thinking of " Shish Kebob " or like our felow Armenians from Hayastan call it " Khorovadz " .

[Arpa]

I am amazed and surprised, and even SHOCKED every time I see people amazed and surprised of new of this sort.

Having not known about this subject is totally our fault as it has mentioned in the Bible at numerous occasions that Jesus did have a a fmily, mother, father, brothers and sisters. See below;

========

Matt.13

 

1.[55] Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

 

Mark.3

 

1.[31] There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

2.[32] And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

3.[33] And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

4.[34] And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

5.[35] For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

 

======

We would never be surprised if we were to go to the source rather than listen to the mumbo jumbo that some self appointed "god on earth" would want us to believe. Jesus never denide his family, neither did he ever claim to be God's blood and flesh. Yes, he did say "My Father in heaven". Don't we say that too? For more allegories let's read Mark 3, verse 35 again.

 

5.[35] For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

As to immaculate conception, Jesus' divinity, and the divine trilogies (trinity) read Greek, Roman and other mythologies. Even Armenian where one would find trinities lik Aramazt, Anahit and Vahakn.

[THOTH]

Arpa - interesting post. Indeed this issue of the definition of "brethren"...leaves one to wonder...as well as references to the "holy father" - etc. And the trinity concept far pre-dates christianity as you have indicated...same with the concept of "immaculate conception" - which leeds one to wonder - brother or half-brother...and just what is Mary's status vis a vis Joseph (ie - the old question [on this forum] of the issue of virginity...though I guess they were married previously...which then begs another question...or would, if I was the husband.... - LOL!)

 

And what about this guy? -

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sip:

James Christ

---

...makes me think of "Jack Schitt"...LOL

 

http://home.pacbell.net/diana_do/knowjack.htm

 

...enjoy!

[Sip]

I fully agree Arpa jan. However, I don't think there is ANY real chance for me to check the source and truth of a significant part of my acumulated knowledge. Since we have a limited time as humans (life-time), we often have no choice but to assume certain things as true, and base our subsequent thinkings on those assumptions. It is the only way we humans have any chance of improving from generation to generation.

 

For example, we assume that classical physics laws are TURE. They seem to work. We successfully use them for several centuries. Then, all of a sudden, quantum mechanics comes in and totally invalidates some of our assumptions in classical physics!!! Surprise Surprise!!!

 

I have had countless hours of arguments with people about why the millenium starts with year 2001 and NOT year 2000. Similarly, I have bashed my head against a wall trying to convince some pepole that the color of something has very little to do with how hot it gets. I have also spent I don't know how long, arguing with some, trying to make them understand that an under-powered amplifier is often MORE dangerous for car audio speakers than an over-powered amplifier (i.e. you are more likely to fry your speakers with a weak amp than with a stronger amp) ...

 

Anyway, the list goes on and on. It is absolutely clear to me that some of our "common knowledge" is very wrong! But never-the-less, I still get surprised and caught off guard with experiencing it in reality

 

Hagarag: Thanks for the reality check! I really needed that

[Azat]

I love it. Could nto stop laughing. Thank Thoth.

[Azat]

By the way, is this box on eBay already or not yet?

[aurguplu]

i have a new international version bible where it is mentioned that jesus had a brother called james?!

 

how come this comes as such a shock to christians?

[MJ]

It doesn't. Only those who have never read the New Testimony are shocked.

[Sip]

The "those" being probably the great majority who depend on TV for their info (such as me) ... but I got Hyeforum too!

[Twilight Bark]

The lack of awareness about the brother has probably been due to the Church's reluctance to advertise that "Virgin" Mary did not stay virgin forever, even if Immaculate Conception is accepted literally at face value.

[Boghos]

As I think was mentioned here a few times, this is an issue that was very much in discussion at the beginnings of Christianity. The smartest populists prevailed as myths are often easier to sell than reality.

[MJ]

Indeed. In 5th to 13th centuries’ Armenia the doctrine of "Virgin" Mary has been dismissed by a very significant portion of the Armenian Christian population. The idea has been indoctrinated in Armenia with sward by the consecutive Byzantine Emperors and has finally been indoctrinated after the exile of Paulicians and the persecution of Thondraketsi, who both have been standing on the grounds of the first century Christianity.

[Arpa]

True!

As I mentioned in a previous item there are numerous passages in the scripture indicating that Jesus did in fact have brothers and sisters but these passages are dismissed as allegorical. Chrsitian "MYTHOLOGY" is heavily reminiscent of the Greek since that was the prevailing culture of the times. Mythicising was done both innocently and with an agenda. One was to deify Jesus, he never said he was "god", but more importantly, as Boghos says, it was to make it palatable to masses who were accustomed to mythology. The concept of immaculate conception, the Trinity, resurrection etc. can be found in many a mythology, all the way from Greek, Egyptian and further east.

Does this mean we must lose all faith?

What does immaculate conception have to do with facts as Peace is better than War, Love is better than Hate and ultimately just plain Good is better than Bad. Does one have to be agenius to see this? Or, even does one have to be told?

The message has been so corrupted, and the messenger has become more important and above the message that people are confused beyond salvage. Is a pedophiliac priest in royal regalia holier than a barefoot missionary with the right message? Or must one have 1000 carat diamond ring and golden slippers to be a credible messenger?

I have been shocked to learn that many a "good Christian" does not even know how many books the Bible has, let alone how many chapters, yet they will kiss the "ring", or a filthy hand for that, confess to a fornicating self appointed "god on earth" and believe to have been redeemed.

If a mortal were to commit the sins of some clergy they would be excommunicated and stoned to death, yet we call them "Holy Father/Hayr Sourb", "Lord Father/Ter Hayr" etc.

If we could only learn to read intelligently and use our brains as God intended for us to rather than swallow all that garbage that has no other purpose than enslave the masses and forify the grip of th hierarchy.

May be mankind likes to be enslaved.

Not me!!!

We are ten times more educated than the most educated clergy. Should we not have a say in the matter??

[MJ]

Indeed, again.

 

The independent minded portion of Armenians has not considered Christ to be the Son of God in the manner or capacity indoctrinated in the course of the traditional brainwashing campaign. Their formula has been that Christ was God’s chosen Son in His Spirituality and God’s adopted Son in his Humanity. Christ had become the adopted Son of God in the result of His Baptism. A careful reading of the scripture supports such interpretation. Moreover, the Armenians subject to discussion have held an opinion that everyone who gets Baptized becomes the Son of God. And they have addressed each other as "Son of God." This expression has survived throughout centuries in Armenia as a form of greeting – "Asdtzo Vordi." I think there is something fundamentally beautiful and just in this early Christian (first century) perception of the identity of Jesus Christ of which, apparently, Armenians have been the champion.

 

Finally, I think one can successfully argue that the Byzantine form of Christianity has been the device of enslavement of the militant Armenian nation and the denigration of the structures of Armenian statehood.

 

However, I think one should also recognize that in the 19th century, when for all practical purposes the Armenian nation had expired, the myth of the "first Christian nation" has provided with some fuel for the religious community to keep going.

 

Equivalently, one can argue that the resurrection of the Armenian pagan thought has been at the roots of the resurrection of national consciousness in 19th and 20th centuries.

 

[i would also contemplate that the final resurrection of the Armenian nation is due to the Genocide – how tragically ironic.]

[khodja]

The pearls of wisdom, enlightenment, expressed here by MJ, Arpa and others is very refreshing. Thr ruse foisted upon all of Christians goes much further when you discover that Jesus progeny presently sit on many of the vestigial thrones of Europe and in the remaining royal houses. While we are all figuratively the children of Jesus, the BIOLOGICAL children of Jesus remain on this earth. This is not to say that the true message of Jesus is not everlasting.

[Boghos]

A common misconception is that there was one original view of Christianity that later branched out into several different interpretations. That view is usually put forward by those that look at the history of Christianity as the history of the Church, or Churches.

 

Churches, as in Catholic Church, Armenian Apostolic Church are institutions created with the declared purpose of promoting Christianity, Christian values. They encourage this manicheistic view where the Church is some kind of moral reserve of society. I will not go much further for it is obvious that Churches are one of the various "actors" in the political scene. One needs only to look at the history of the Church, especially the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages, but I digress.

 

My point is that the idea that there is some kind of doctrinary-insitutional monopoly, or for that matter oligopoly, on what Christianity proposes is utterly ridiculous. As Arpa has said Christianity in essence is very simple. There is hardly a need for an institution to intermediate. And perhaps there is nothing to be intermediated to in any case.

[aurguplu]

tragically ironic, but not unique: witness the jewish case, for instance: three years after the holocaust, the first jewish state in more than 1,000 years was born.

[aurguplu]

jesus -

 

i messed it up again with the quotations above. sorry mj.

[Arpa]

Tragically ironic or ironically tragic...

Indeed. Ali's comparison with the Jewish sag may be more than meets the eye. Armenians claim to have blood kinship with the Jews, Hogwash! Yet there may be some point in that that both peoples are cut from the same cloth of idiocy. They both only remember about their "promised land" in times of crisis while otherwise each in their own way are otherwise preoccupied with chasing that pot of gold.

Tragically ironic as it may it is not the first time neither it may be the last. Armenians have always gathered themselves only in times of crisis, and tragically ironic many subsist solely by the memory of the Genocide. It is a scary though but what will happen to us once Turkey repents and acknowledges, what will we base our existence upon? What will hold us together? Not gold for sure, it may be the next biggest cause of division after religion.

Ironic!

If Descartes had postulated his cliche after the Genocide, or if he were Armenian he may have said: "Dolorem ergo sum" (I hurt therefor I am).

[Sip]

AMEN brotha Arpa (and brotha MJ) ... preach ON borthas ... I feel the power of the LORD inside me. Heeeeeee Haaaa

 

As far as that Descartes quote, as a good friend of mine says, should go this way: "I think, therefore YOU are." I happen to prefer this one much more

 

[ November 13, 2002, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: Sip ]