All of you should read my post of April 24, 2011. http://netseri.blogspot.com/2011/04/resurrection.html. I want to make some major updates on this controversy. On Monday, March 5, 2012, Professors James Tabor and Simcha Jacobovici will present a new book to the public, The Jesus Discovery. I have read it. It is well written and honest.
The book tells the story of a second tomb, found 200 feet away from the first Talpiot tomb, the one called the Garden or Jesus Family Tomb. This tomb was apparently built by the owner of an rich estate. It is well decorated, great care was taken in constructing it, the ossuaries are well made and filled with bones, and except for an initial survey in 1981, this tomb is undisturbed. The ossuary that takes precedence, the first one in the door, is filled with bones. It has a picture of the Great Fish and Jonah, the Prophet, coming out of the fish's mouth. The scholars agree that this picture is an allusion to the statement of Yeshua that his great sign would be the "Sign of Jonah." The sign of Jonah is an allusion to Resurrection. This picture is the first of many Christian icons depicting the coming of Jonah out of the mouth of the Great Fish, Leviathan. The picture makes Resurrection a central issue for the earliest Christians, that is, the Jerusalem Church prior to the death of James in 62 C.E. It speaks louder than a thousand words. A second inscription in Greek is on another ossuary which alludes to the Divine YHVH raising some one up. Using the name of G-d on an ossuary would have been a heretical act.
The book adds new information on Mary Magdalene. Mariamene Mara was not the sister or mother of the person named Yeshua bar Yotzef. Tradition would say that the only other person, except blood relatives, that would be buried in the family tomb would be a wife. The evidence points to Mariamene the Lady being the wife of Yeshua ben Yotzef.
The book adds new information on the James Ossuary. Shimon Gibson says that there were 10 ossuaries in the Jesus Tomb when he saw it in 1980. The Israel Antiquities Authority has lost one of the ossuaries. He argues that there may have been an eleventh ossuary. The evidence on the James Ossuary shows 1) that it came from the Jesus Family Tomb, 2) that it probably was open to weathering for 200 hundred years, and 3) it was not a forgery. With this additional evidence, the likelihood that this is the Jesus Family Tomb is virtually certain. Certainly, the likelihood is well beyond a reasonable doubt.
The bones of Yeshua were in the ossuary and have been tested.
From this evidence, we can conclude that the man in the ossuary was not bodily resurrected. We can conclude that he was married and had a son who died prior to 70 C.E. We can conclude that the other persons buried in the Tomb were the family of Yeshua, including his mother, Mary, his brother Yoseh (Joses), and his cousin, Matya or Matthew Alphaeus.
It is inconceivable that the person in the Patio tomb would have come to believe in a bodily resurrection for Yeshua and himself from the events surrounding the death of Yeshua. It is also inconceivable that the picture, hand-drawn on the ossuary, in contradiction to the commandment against graven images, would have been placed there had the person not believed that some remarkable event had occurred to Yeshua. We can therefore eliminate the idea of a bodily resurrection from the discussion. The third idea, that Yeshua did not die, and that some one else did, can be eliminated because it would have been insufficient to cause Joseph of Arimathea to violate the commandment and engrave the picture on the ossuary. That leaves a reasonable person with the second possibility.
We can conclude that there was a spiritual resurrection. We can conclude that Yeshua had gotten the body of an Angel. We can conclude that the Angel Yeshua appeared for 50 days before he went up to heaven. This belief is consistent with the early church's belief that Yeshua was an Archangel or the Nasorean belief that He is the Archangel of the Presence, Metatron. This teaching does not change the meaning of the Nicene Creed on resurrection nor does it solve the question of what really happened, but it does prove that the Resurrection is a in a changed body, a spiritual body, a body like an angel or an elemental.
Now, while I cannot speak for the Sanhedrin, I can say that I support the idea of a spiritual body and a spiritual resurrection and declare that such a belief is within the realms of orthodox belief for the Nasorean Orthodox Qahal.
I also find the discoveries interesting. However, I think there is some warrant for skepticism here. First, both Talpiot tombs now have been reported on near Easter - a clear sign they are motivated to make money. While I cannot fault a man for looking to make a living, the fact that these discoveries are hyped before any significant peer review is cause for concern. In this latest case, however, Tabor did at least do himself some favors and released a preliminary study, which was academic in nature, and very informative. However, scholars have taken issue with a few of their findings.
ReplyDeleteFirst, many regard the Jonah & The Wahle etching to merely be a nephesh. Tabor acknowledged the possibility, but disregarded it (and had some justification). I am no scholar in this area. To be honest, to symbol - to me - looks like neither. However, the fact that there are other fish on it seems to me to support Tabor's conclusion.
Second, much of the analysis rested on other preliminary conclusions. In other words, this is an intricate chain of reasoning, and if a link breaks, the whole chain is compromised. Perhaps the weakest link is the fact that the iota in the Tetragrammaton is not indicative of a first-century iota. First-century iotas are universally (thus far) devoid of horizontals on the top-and bottom, where as the one in question does have them. It is either an exception to a very clear pattern, or it is not First Century. If it is not 1st Century, then obviously this is a much less interesting find. See here: http://bit.ly/zpYRum
Third, part of the analysis depends on the "sign of Jonah" being linked to the resurrection in Q. However, this link is not actually made in Q, so Tabor was in error. Q does refer to the sign of Jonah, but not in a resurrection sense. See here: http://bit.ly/zDS9KR . My guess is the fact that Jonah is still connected to Jesus in Q will be enough for people to make the connection, nevertheless, it's an important error to point out.
Fourth, the fact that the tombs are 200 feet away does not, by itself, mean they are related. Certainly, they would seem to be if Tabor's conclusions are correct. But that's a big *IF*.
Finally, I would just point out that (possibly) finding bones of Jesus does *not* actually rule out a Resurrection. Technically, it only rules out the Ascension. However, the fact that Luke would be wrong on such an important point would certainly cast doubt on many other issues in his works.
All this aside, it's obviously a fascinating find. i do think many scholars are too dismissive of it. However, Tabor & Co. probably bring that on themselves by hyping the finds, instead of going about reporting them a little more academically.
Actually, if you will read my next blog, I think that it will all be explained. However, Tabor says that the Patio Tomb clearly shows that the occupants believed in resurrection. Your difficulty, imho, centers on a lack of understanding of other options.
ReplyDelete