The Jesus Discovery

by James D. Tabor

  27. Going from west to east the niches contained respectively groupings of two, two, none, one, two, and three ossuaries. See Shimon Gibson’s map, p. 29.

  28. Ouriel’s account of his discovery of the tomb is available as a blog entry at http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/ViewEntry.asp?entryid=930249&r=1, posted March 9, 2007.

  29. See Michael Balter, “Archaeologists and Rabbis Clash Over Human Remains,” Science 7 (January 2000): 34–35.

  30. So far as we know, the first extensive DNA tests done on a Jerusalem tomb from this period were commissioned by Shimon Gibson, Boaz Zissu, and James Tabor on the skeletal remains of a looted Hinnom Valley tomb in 2000. See http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0008319 for the published results.

  31. See Kloner and Gibson, “The Talpiot Tomb Reconsidered.”

  32. In Gath’s original typed report, dated April 15, 1980, he does not mention inscriptions but on his handwritten “dig card,” dated the same day he noted, “So far about four inscriptions were found on the ossuaries.”

  33. It is catalogued as S 767 and appears as No. 9/Plate 2 in the Rachmani catalogue. Sukenik found it in a basement storage area of the Palestinian Archaeological Museum (today the Rockefeller) in Jerusalem in 1926. It is today on display in the Israel Museum. When Sukenik published a report about the ossuary in January 1931, the news that such an inscription existed, the only one ever found inscribed “Jesus son of Joseph,” created no small stir in the world press, particularly in Europe. See L. H. Vincent, “Épitaphe prétendue de N.S. Jésus-Christ,” Atti della pontificia: Academia romana di archaeologie: Rendiconti 7 (1929–30): 213–39.

  34. Gath published a short preliminary report in 1981, but before the ossuary inscriptions had been deciphered; Hadashot Arkheologiyot 76 (1981): 24–26. See Rahmani, CJO 701, p. 222.

  35. “My husband knew it was Jesus’ tomb,” by David Horovitz, Jerusalem Post, January 17, 2008 and “Widow: Archaeologist kept ‘Jesus tomb’ discovery secret for fear of anti-Semitism,” by Jonathan Lis, Haaretz, January 17, 2008. Rahmani thanked Joseph Gath as the excavator for permission to publish his finds in the CJO volume, p. 222. This acknowledgment likely indicates that Rahmani discussed the inscriptions with Gath in the late 1980s when the catalogue was being prepared.

  36. London Sunday Times, March 31, 1996, p. 1.

  37. Amos Kloner, “A Tomb with Inscribed Ossuaries in East Talpiyot, Jerusalem,” Atiquot 29 (1996): 15–22.

  38. See Kloner and Gibson, “The Talpiot Tomb Reconsidered,” where they express their views quite emphatically.

  39. Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty, p. 4.

  40. See http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/; Jacobovici and Pellegrino, The Jesus Family Tomb; and James D. Tabor, “Testing a Hypothesis,” Near Eastern Archaeology 69: 3–4 (2006): 132–36, and “The Talpiot ‘Jesus’ Tomb: A Historical Analysis,” in The Tomb of Jesus and His Family? Exploring Ancient Jewish Tombs Near Jerusalem’s Walls: The Fourth Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins, ed. James H. Charlesworth and Arthur C. Boulet (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2011).

  41. Typed report of Gath dated April 15, 1980, now in the IAA archive files for License 938.

  42. Compare Matthew 27:57–61, Luke 23:50–56, John 19:38–42.

  43. Matthew’s assertion that this temporary tomb belonged to Joseph is clearly an interpolation added for theological reasons (Matthew 27:60). It lacks any historical basis or even likelihood. What would be the chances that Joseph, who took charge of Jesus’ burial, just happened to own a tomb adjacent to the place the Romans used to crucify criminals? A major theme of Matthew’s gospel is to show how Jesus fulfilled prophecies of the Hebrew Bible as the messiah. Here he has in mind Isaiah 53:9, which he interprets as requiring the “suffering servant” to be buried in a rich man’s tomb. None of the other gospels make this claim and John, in explaining the circumstances for the choice of this temporary tomb, flatly contradicts Matthew.

  CHAPTER TWO: TWO TALPIOT TOMBS

  1. Shimon Gibson, The Cave of John the Baptist: The Stunning Archaeological Discovery That Has Redefined Christian History (New York: Doubleday, 2004), and the review in Biblical Archaeology Review archived at http://www.bib-arch.org/reviews/review-cave-of-john-the-baptist.asp.

  2. Gibson, Tabor, and some UNC Charlotte students, who had been excavating at Suba, were hiking in the area of Akeldama, the ravine just south of Jerusalem’s Old City, in July 2000. The tomb turned out to have the remains of the only ancient burial shroud ever found in Jerusalem, confirmed by carbon-14 tests as dating to the 1st century CE.

  3. Andre Lemaire, “Burial Box of James the Brother of Jesus,” Biblical Archaeology Review 28:6 (November–December 2002): 24–33, and Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington III, The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus and His Family (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2003).

  4. The authenticity of parts of the inscription, particularly the phrase “brother of Jesus,” was questioned by some. See Neil Asher Silberman and Yuval Goren, “Faking Biblical History,” Archeology 56:5 (September–October 2003): 22–30. A protracted legal battle charging the owner of the ossuary, Oded Golan, with forgery, is nearing an end as we write this book. The evidence seems to show rather conclusively that the entire inscription is authentic; see http://bibleinterp.com/articles/authjam358012.shtml. We will cover this subject in detail in chapter 6.

  5. See http://ancientdna.com.

  6. Oded says he is not sure just when he acquired the James ossuary and initially, in 2002, he said “fifteen to twenty years ago.” Later, with further checking, he put the date back as early as 1978.

  7. Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino, The Jesus Family Tomb: The Evidence Behind the Discovery No One Wanted to Find, rev. pbk. ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2007)

  8. See http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/movie_overview/decoders.html for background on the initial participants in the Talpiot “Jesus tomb” research.

  9. In the course of the investigation for the 2007 film The Lost Tomb of Jesus, dozens of additional academic experts were brought into the investigation, all of whom signed a standard nondisclosure agreement. Among the principals were François Bovon (historian of early Christianity, Harvard University), James H. Charlesworth (biblical scholar, Princeton Theological Seminary), Frank Moore Cross (Hebrew Bible scholar and epigrapher, Harvard University), John Dominic Crossan (New Testament scholar, DePaul University), Shimon Gibson (archaeologist, Albright Institute), Andrey Feuerverger (statistician, University of Toronto), Tal Ilan (Jewish studies, Freie University, Berlin), Amos Kloner (archaeologist, Bar Ilan University, Israel), Israel Knohl (Hebrew Bible, Hebrew University, Jerusalem), Jerome Murphy-O’Connor (New Testament, École Biblique in Jerusalem), and Stephen J. Pfann (University of the Holy Land, Jerusalem). Each contributed in his or her area of expertise without necessarily assenting to the main thesis of the film. See http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/experts.html for biographical details.

  10. Acts of Philip 8:16, 21; 13:1–2, 4. See François Bovon, “Mary Magdalene in the Acts of Philip,” in E. Stanley Jones, ed., Which Mary? The Marys of Early Christian Tradition, Symposium Series, SBL 19 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature), pp. 75–89.

  11. The Aramaic name Marta (Martha) is derived from Mar/Mara. Some argue that Mara is just an alternative form of Martha but as we explain in chapter 5, such is not the case.

  12. In a short published report Kloner specifically says that “two of the ossuaries bore names incised in Greek.” Amos Kloner, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 1982, vol. 1, nos. 78–81 (October 1982), p. 51.

  13. See “The Aftermath” and “The World Reacts” in The Jesus Family Tomb, pp. 213–18, 219–34.

  14. A director’s cut version is available on DVD and through Netflix: http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Tomb-Jesus-Simcha-Jacobovici/dp/B000OHZJSC and http://movies.netflix.com/Movie/The-Lost-Tomb-of-Jesus/70064836#height1991. The website is http://jesusfamilytomb.com/. http://dsc
.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/tomb.html. Of the hundreds of websites that address the subject of the Talpiot Jesus tomb the best and most balanced in our opinion is http://talpiottomb.com/.

  15. Louis Lapides, Burying the Jesus Tomb Controversy: Errors and Conclusions Found in the Lost Tomb of Jesus (Agoura Hills, CA: Scripture Solutions, 2007), Dillon Burrows, The Jesus Family Tomb Controversy: How the Evidence Falls Short (Ann Arbor, MI: Nimble Books, 2007), Don Sausa, The Jesus Tomb: Is It Fact or Fiction? Scholars Chime In (San Ramon, CA: Vision Press, 2007), Gary R. Habermas, The Secret of the Talpiot Tomb: Unraveling the Mystery of the Jesus Family Tomb (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2008), René A. López, The Jesus Family Tomb Examined (Springfield, MO: 21st Century Press, 2008), The Jesus Tomb Unmasked, DVD (Brigham City, UT: Living Hope Ministries, 2009).

  16. The main objections are addressed based on what we knew in 2007 by James Tabor in an epilogue to the paperback edition of The Jesus Family Tomb, pp. 219–34.

  17. The volume is now in press: The Tomb of Jesus and His Family? Exploring Ancient Jewish Tombs Near Jerusalem’s Walls: The Fourth Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins, ed. James H. Charlesworth and Arthur C. Boulet (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2011).

  18. A summary and analysis of the results of the conference by James Tabor is archived at http://sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=749.

  19. For the rigorous requirements for an IAA license see http://www.antiquities.org.il/about_eng.asp?Modul_id=108.

  20. http://walterklassen.com.

  21. See Rahmani, CJO, p. 34.

  22. See Rahmani, CJO, pp. 31–32.

  CHAPTER THREE: DECODING THE MYSTERIOUS SIGN OF JONAH

  1. See Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, 5th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).

  2. Quotations from the Bible are from the Revised Standard Version, with some revisions by the authors for accuracy and clarity.

  3. Here in Mark 4:9, 23 but also compare Matthew 11:15; 13:9, 15–16, 43; Luke 8:8; 14:35.

  4. The Q hypothesis, often referred to as the “two source” hypothesis (Mark and Q being the two sources), was first expounded in 1838 by C. H. Weisse.

  5. For a reconstruction and translation of Q in English see http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~kloppen/iqpqet.htm.

  6. John Kloppenborg, Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000).

  7. Based on prophecies in the Hebrew Bible there developed an expectation for the arrival of a native king or “messiah” who would be a bloodline descendant of King David (Jeremiah 23:5). See Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty, pp. 144–48.

  8. Scholars have debated for centuries how to fit “three days and three nights” into the period from Friday sundown until Sunday/Easter morning—which is obviously two nights and hardly three days. There is good evidence that Jesus was in fact crucified on a Thursday, not a Friday, before the Sabbath of Passover, not the weekly Sabbath. If such is the case then Matthew’s saying about the three days and three nights will fit the narrative—Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights, followed by the empty tomb on Sunday. See Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty, pp. 198–207.

  9. See Simon Chow, The Sign of Jonah Reconsidered: A Study of Its Meaning in the Gospel Traditions, Coniectanea Biblica: New Testament Series, vol. 27 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wilsell International, 1995), pp. 27–44.

  10. Lives of the Prophets 10:1–3; 2 Maccabees 6:8.

  11. The original is lost and most date the Armenian translation to the 6th century CE. See Michael E. Stone, Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and Armenian Studies: Collected Papers, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta (Leuven: Peeters, 2006). See Hans Lewy, The Pseudo-Philonic De Jona. Part I: The Armenian Text with a Critical Introduction (London: Christophers, 1936).

  12. Translation by Jacob Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1991). The Mishnah is one of the earlier collections of rabbinic interpretations of the Torah, put together in the early 3rd century CE but often reflecting earlier traditions.

  13. Jacob Neusner, Christian Faith and the Bible of Judaism: The Judaic Encounter with Scripture, Brown Judaic Studies, 208 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), pp. 4–9.

  14. Erwin R. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, vol. 2, Bollingen Series 37 (New York: Pantheon Books, 1953), pp. 225–27.

  15. Rachel Hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Land of Israel (Leiden: Brill, 1988) and Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Diaspora (Leiden: Brill, 1998).

  16. Graydon F. Snyder, Ante-Pacem: Archaeological Evidence of Church Life before Constantine (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2003), p. 87.

  17. Robin Jensen, Understanding Early Christian Art (New York and London: Routledge, 2000), pp. 173–77.

  18. See Chow, The Sign of Jonah Reconsidered, pp. 176–93, for a survey of texts.

  19. Dialogue with Trypho 107.

  20. Acts of Paul 3:29–31.

  21. b. Hullin 67b; b. Baba Batra 74a; 2 Esdras 6: 49–53, 1 Enoch 90:7–9.

  22. See Kloner and Zissu, Necropolis of Jerusalem, pp. 110–11.

  23. See Cotton, CIIP, nos. 460, 359, 375, 451.

  24. See the discussion of Rahmani, CJO, no. 455, and Cotton, CIIP, no. 93.

  25. In the 3rd century CE at Bet She’arim brief expressions of encouragement and consolation occur on 40 out of the 220 inscriptions at the site; see Rahmani, CJO, p. 17.

  26. Hundreds of dedicatory inscriptions all over the Mediterranean world have been found that read “To the Most High God.” See Stephen Mitchell, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos between Pagans, Jews, and Christians,” in Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity, ed. Polymnia Athanassiadi and Michael Frede (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), pp. 81–147. These use the superlative hupsistos, which means “most high” and is related to the verb found in our inscription, upsoo, “to lift up.”

  27. For additional examples see Cotton, CIIP, nos. 84, 112, 113, 284, 383, 509, and 606.

  28. Diodorus Siculus, History 1.94; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.35.3; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 5.6; Origen, Commentary on John 2.1. The expanded form IAIO occurs on a magical curse tablet from Carthage; see David R. Jordan, “Notes from Carthage,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 111 (1996): 115–23.

  29. It would be either a third-person aorist or future but unlikely present in this context since that would require a first-person subject.

  30. See the extensive treatment on HUPSOS in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), pp. 602–20.

  31. Thanksgiving Hymns (1QH 6:34; 11:12).

  32. Pau Figueras, “Jewish and Christian Beliefs of Life After Death in the Light of the Ossuary Decoration” (Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University, 1974). His more comprehensive work is Decorated Jewish Ossuaries, Documenta Et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui 20 (Leiden: Brill, 1983).

  33. Rahmani, CJO, no. 140.

  34. Cotton, CIIP, no. 546.

  35. See Rahmani, CJO, pp. 25–28, for a negative evaluation of the theories of E. R. Goodenough, Bellarmino Bagatti, Emmanuele Testa, and Pau Figueras with bibliography.

  36. Rachmani, CJO, no. 108; Cotton, CIIJ, no. 133.

  37. Tal Ilan, Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity, Part I, Palestine 330 BCE–200 CE, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 91 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002).

  38. E. L. Sukenik, “The Earliest Records of Christianity,” in American Journal of Archaeology 51 (1947): 351–65. There has been an extensive discussion and critique of Sukenik’s proposals; see the bibliography in Cotton, CIIP, p. 502.

  39. See a summary of the discussion with analysis by J. P. Kane, “By No Means ‘The Earliest Records of Christianity’—with an Emended Reading of the Talpioth Inscription ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΙΟΥ,” in Palestine Exploration Quarterly 103 (1971): 103–8.

  40. See Cotto
n, CIIP, no. 247, and Gideon Avni and Shimon Gibson, “The ‘Jewish-Christian’ Tomb From the Mount of Offense (Batn Al-Hawa’) in Jerusalem Reconsidered,” Revue Biblique 115 (1998): 161–75, who argue this tomb and its markings have nothing to do with early Jewish-Christianity. Joan Taylor, Christians and the Holy Places: The Myth of Jewish Christian Origins (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), pp. 5–12.

  41. See R. H. Smith, “The Cross Marks on Jewish Ossuaries,” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 106 (1974): 40–49, for the arguments.

  42. See Cotton, CIIP, no. 263.

  43. Cotton, CIIP, nos. 425, 546, 547, 548, 583.

  44. See Cotton, CIIP, nos. 139, 195, 206, 239, 247, 267, 295, 320.

  45. See Cotton, CIIP, nos. 36, 109, 489.

  CHAPTER FOUR: RETURNING TO THE JESUS FAMILY TOMB

  1. Kloner and Gibson, “The Talpiot Tombs Reconsidered.”

  2. Two of the decorated ossuaries had inscriptions (IAA 80.500: Maramenon (he) Mara [Gk] and IAA 80.501: Yehuda bar Yeshua) and four of the “plain” or undecorated ones (IAA 80. 502: Matya/Matah; IAA 80.503: Yeshua bar Yehosef; IAA 80.504: Yoseh; and IAA 80. 505: Maria/Marya). See Rahmani, CJO, pp. 222–24.

  3. The statistics on name frequencies are drawn from Tal Ilan, Lexicon of Jewish Names. She finds a total of 2,538 occurrences of male names and 320 of female but from a four-hundred-year period, 200 BCE to 200 CE. Hachlili, Jewish Funerary Customs, Practices and Rites in the Second Temple Period, offers a somewhat different tabulation from a more limited chronological sample, namely 30 BCE to 70 CE. See p. 200 for a convenient summary chart that breaks down male and female names and their percentages according to Hachlili’s methods. Both offer comprehensive surveys of all male and female Jewish names, in the periods specified, drawn from all sources, not just from ossuary inscriptions. The percentages of ossuary name frequencies are generally in line with the wider compilations by Tal Ilan and Hachlili. The ossuary names represent a random sampling that tends to hold up statistically since the number of inscriptions, 650 total, is quite large.