Don’t Lose Any Sleep Over Jesus’ Lost Tomb
February 27th, 2007
(By Nathan Busenitz)
Updated: March 1 – According to what I’ve been able to gather so far, the primary (really, the only) argument that the promoters of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” have produced is a statistical one.
According to their website, the show’s producers found a tomb in Jerusalem containing ten ossuaries (stone boxes in which the bones of the deceased were kept), which they believe date back to either the first century BC or the first century AD. Six of the ossuaries have names inscribed on the outside (five in Hebrew, and one in Greek).
The show’s creators assert that the six names (when translated into English) are Joseph, Mary, Jesus Son of Joseph, Mary [Magdelene], Judah Son of Jesus, and Matthew. These names, they contend, correspond to the names of Jesus Christ and His family. Based on the probability of first four of these names occuring together in the same tomb, they calculate a 600-to-1 statistical probability that this is Jesus’ family tomb (and the tomb of Jesus Himself).
But how impressive is their case, really?
Not very… their statistical case quickly falls apart when one considers the massive assumptions (and major difficulties) that undergird their conclusions. (To be honest, the whole thing reminds me of this book.)
First, the producers assume that they have rightly interpreted the names inscribed on the ossuaries. But this is unlikely. For instance, “Jesus, son of Joseph” is hardly legible. And “Mary Magdelene” (from “Mariamene e Mara”) is almost certainly an incorrect interpretation — since “Mara” is probably a contraction of Martha, and thus a second name (maybe even referring to a second person). Even the downloadable article on “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” website (by L.Y. Rahmani) acknowledges that this was probably a double name and that “the second name [is] a contraction of Martha.”
Second, their conclusion assumes that the relationships between each of the individuals in the tomb has been correctly identified. Was the individual whose remains are marked “Yose” (Joseph) married to the individual named “Maria”, or was he a son of Maria (as the show suggests)? Or (as the show’s producers assert) was the individual marked “Jesus Son of Joseph” married to the individual named “Mariamene e Mara”? And what was “Matia’s” relationship to everyone? There is no real way to know, beyond mere speculation.
Third, (as noted above) the show assumes that Jesus Christ was married (to Mary Magdalene) and that together they had a son (in this case, named Judah). Thanks to The Da Vinci Code, this is a popular notion nowadays. And, also thanks to The Da Vinci Code it is an idea that has been soundly refuted by evangelical scholars (see here and here, for example). If it can be demonstrated that Jesus was not married to Mary Magdalene, and that He did not produce a line of offspring, the entire “lost tomb” hypothesis collapses.
Fourth, the show’s premise essentially ignores the commonness of the names cited on the ossuaries. According to the show’s own research, “Joseph” was the second-most-common male name in first-century Israel, “Mary” was the most-common female name, and “Jesus” was the sixth-most-common male name.
To put that in today’s American society (according to a 1990 census), “Joseph” would be equivalent to the name “John” (as the second-most-popular name), “Mary” equivalent to the name “Mary” (which is still the most-popular woman’s name), and “Jesus” would be equivalent to the name “David” (as the sixth-most-popular name).
If we found a gravesite today in which there was a tombstone for “John,” and another for “David, John’s son” – Would we be able to assert with any degree of certainty which “David” we were talking about? I wonder how many “Johns” there are (or have been in the last two centuries) in the United States who have had a wife named “Mary” and a son named “Dave.” Certainly many more than just one.
Then, if we knew that the “David” we were looking for was unmarried and from Los Angeles, but the grave we found was for a “David” who was married and was buried in New York, what would we conclude?
Fifth, the show’s conclusion fails to account for the name Matthew (“Matia”). Despite the fact that there is no record of anyone physically related to Jesus Christ named Matthew, the producers simply assume that there must have been (since, after all, this has to be Jesus’ family tomb). In the end, since Matthew does not fit nicely into the show’s hypothesis, he is left out of the final statistical calculations.
Sixth, the producers fail to account for a host of other problems – such as
- the fact that Jesus’ family was from Nazareth, not Jerusalem; thus their family burial spot would have been in Galilee, not Jerusalem
- the fact that Jesus’ half-brothers James and Jude would die as Christian martyrs (despite knowing about Jesus’ remains and the family burial ground)
- the notion that Jesus’ family was able to conceal this family burial site from the entire early church (especially since putting the bones in an ossuary was a year-long process)
- the assumption that Jesus’ family could afford a wealthy burial place such as this; that the religious authorities (who hated Jesus) would have allowed them to hold on to it; and that those same authorities would have said nothing about the burial location of Jesus (and His family) in spite of their desire to debunk the resurrection
- the fact that Jesus’ family did a very ship-shod job of inscribing Jesus’ name into His ossuary, making it hardly legible (even though they deeply respected and venerated Him)
- the fact that neither Jesus nor His followers referred to Him as “Son of Joseph,” yet that is how the name is inscribed on this ossuary
If all of these “problem factors” were given proper statistical weight (and more could be added to this list), the 600-to-1 ratio would not only drastically decrease, it would totally reverse.
Much more could be said about all this (and indeed has been, per the sites we listed yesterday). As we noted then, we will try to keep you updated as more information is made available. In the meantime, don’t lose any sleep over “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.” It is simply not a serious challenge to the central doctrines of the Christian faith (despite the hype its producers are trying to create).
Speaking of sleep, it’s getting late. Perhaps I should follow my own advice, and go to bed.
Goodnight.
*****
Addendum:
I also wanted to highlight a couple other points:
(1) The show’s creators are trying to tie in the alleged ossuary of James (Jesus’ half-brother) to bolster their case — claiming that it was originally part of this same tombsite. The greatest problem with this (if it really is James’ ossuary) is that the James’ ossuary was discovered in the 1970s, while the “Yeshua” ossuaries were not discovered until the 1980s. Thus, James’ ossuary could not have been in the “Jesus family” tomb. (Online Source, see point 6)
Also, the evidence of church history (from Eusebius) indicates that the place of James’ grave was well-known in ancient times, and that he was buried alone in a different part of Jerusalem. (Online Source, see point 5)
Furthermore, the archeologist (Amost Kloner) who originally found the tomb says he documented the “missing” ossuary. It was a different size than the James’ ossuary and had no markings on it (Online Source). In other words, the “missing” ossuary and the alleged James’ ossuary cannot be the same.
(2) It has been pointed out by others that these ossuaries have been known about by scholars since the early 1980s. The reason the premise of this show has not been put forward before is that no serious scholars believe it to be credible. According to Joel Rosenberg’s website, the Israeli archeologist who originally discovered the tomb believes this new film is nonsense.
(3) The show’s leading historian, James Tabor, published a book last year asserting that Joseph was not Jesus’ father (see point 6 here). For him to now claim that an ossuary marked, “Jesus son of Joseph” contains the bones of Jesus Christ contradicts his own research. Al Mohler pointed out this hypocrisy on last night’s episode of Larry King Live.
(4) Professor Stephen Pfann of the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem (who was interviewed in the documentary), believes the name interpreted as “Jesus” should actually be read as “Hanun” (Online Source). Pfann believes the hypothesis put forward by the show has very little weight.
(5) In rereading some of the documentation regarding the show, I realized that the show’s producers actually assert that the “Yose” ossuary does not refer to “Joseph” (the father), but rather to “Joseph” Jesus’ brother (Matt. 13:55). (I made a small change to my original article above to reflect this.) Chris Rosebrough argues that this is even more far-fetched. Along those lines, if you read Matthew 13:55 you find that Jesus had at least four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Jude). What happened to James, Simon, and Jude? (The claims that James’ ossuary is authentic and that it came from this gravesite are highly suspect.) And who is “Matia”?
(6) Chris Rosebrough runs a few numbers and concludes that the probability that this was Jesus’ family tomb is more like 1 in 7.5 million. Of course, since Jesus rose, we know that the actual probability is zero. Nonetheless, Chris’s analysis is interesting and helpful. Christopher Butler also provides helpful analysis at his weblog.
(7) Ben Witherington cites Richard Bauckham who demonstrates linguistically that the name on the “Mary Magdalene” ossuary does not actually refer to Mary Magdalene (see here). Ben Witherington has also reviewed the book related to the documentary.
Good points, Nathan. It’s obvious, these guys are opportunists, as is most of liberal media. Their assertions are so unfounded, which is why they are “appealing to the people”, instead of appealing to “peer review” and rigorous critical scrutiny–which is coming
–I’m sure they’re just hoping to make a “few cents” before their “show is shut-down”. I’ve even read and heard “some” secular folks ridiculing this whole lost tomb fabrication. Anyway, good work here.
A quick check of the most convenient Bible dictionary that came to hand showed three Josephs and five Marys in the New Testament alone. Perhaps one of the mistakes Cameron made (like his putting smoke coming out of all four of Titanic’s smokestacks when one was a dummy) was assuming ‘Jesus’ to have been an uncommon name the way it is in the English-speaking world today.
But then since his ‘well-researched’ ‘Titanic’ contained such errors as the smokestack one and putting the first-class passengers in evening clothes the night before going ashore, not to mention having the ship break in two spectacularly when only a handful of surviors reported that it did (and they were not believed), it is perhaps all we could expect. Good scholarship? the bloke’s a film producer, not an archaeologist. Whereas I am a historian and the son of a historian.
[...] Update 2, 2/27: Pulpit Magazine again weighs in on the “controversy,” with some comments from Nathan Busenitz. [...]
[...] Read Christian blog responses from James White (and here, here, and here), Ben Witherington, Darrell Bock, Scot McKnight, and Nathan Busenitz. [...]
Why is everyone so quick to dispute the “Jesus Tomb” theory? If it can be proven to be His tomb then it would be God’s Will and for whatever reason, would be part of His Plan to bring about His Kingdom on Earth.
Note to All: I adjusted my fourth point, above, just to make it more clear. Also, I will be adding some additional thoughts later today.
Bobby and Highland, thanks for your comments. Good thoughts!
Yes, the fools (Ps. 14:4) who never stop denying Jesus are out in full force, ably supported by their lackeys in the media. Ever notice how they never do a show called “The Search for the REAL Mohammed” or “Seeking the Historical Buddha”? Thanks for holding forth the Truth, Nathan.
The reference in my post should be Ps. 14:1.
Susan,
To quote Paul, if the “Jesus Tomb” theory were to prove true, “our faith is in vain” and “we are of all people most to be pitied”. He also said “If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”"
Simply put, the resurrection is THE central fact of the Christian faith – if Christ did not raise from the dead we have no hope.
That’s not to say we shouldn’t examine such claims when they are made. But we cannot naively suggest that if these claims are true that somehow Christianity remains true.
We know Jesus rose bodily. Not only because of the Spirit’s testimony to us (experience…subjective) but because the New testament is the most verifiable document of the ancient world. No serious Christian would be troubled by these “new revelations” except when considering the emotions which will be experienced by the documentarians when they stand before this “dead” Christ. Now THAT’S disturbing.
Nathan,
Did you hear the news? Some archaeologists did carbon-14 dating on the tomb, and it turns out that it’s actually 13 billion years old. So we’re off the hook. Whew!
I can poke just as many holes in Nathan Busenitz’s claims above as he can with anything else.
He wonders how it could be determined that people in that tomb were related to each other.
DUH!
1. Jesus, son of Joseph, would have the DNA of both parents (Joseph & Mary).
2. Judah, son of Jesus, would have the DNA of both Jesus and Mary Magdalene, as well as DNA from both of Jesus’s parents.
Was that so difficult to understand?
Religious hypocrites who for years have screamed Jesus actually existed, now are hell-bent on trying to dismiss this, as if they do not want any proof that he existed.
Pathetic.
Rev. Smith,
Actually, according to the documentary’s website, the only DNA testing that was done was from the “Jesus son of Joseph” ossuary and the “Mariamene e Mara” ossuary. This DNA testing demonstrated that the two individuals in those ossuaries were not physically related.
As Darrell Bock notes,
On the Discovery Channel website (under “DNA Evidence”) it notes that “researchers were able to extract usable tissue samples from only two of the ossuaries — the ‘Mariamne’ and ‘Yeshua bar Joseph’ boxes.” In other words no DNA testing was done on “Yose,” “Maria,” or “Judah” to determine whether or not “Jesus son of Joseph” was a physical descendant of “Maria” or whether or not “Judah son of Jesus” was a descendant of “Mariamene e Mara.”
All that the DNA can prove is that “Yeshua” and “Mariamne” were not physically related. That’s it. Anything beyond this, including the idea that they were married, is speculation.
Rev. Smith said:
Religious hypocrites who for years have screamed Jesus actually existed, now are hell-bent on trying to dismiss this, as if they do not want any proof that he existed.
Actually, Rev., I have no doubt that Jesus bar Joseph existed in the first Century Judea, there are plenty of other Jesus bar Joseph ossuaries that have similarily been found over the years (just go see Gloner, the archaeologist who found these Talipot ossuaries in the 80’s–he is an “expert” and affirms the multiplicity of ossuaries with the name Jesus son of Joseph on them). . . so as a Christian I affirm that there were plenty of historical “Joshuas son’s of Joseph” walking around in the first century.
Furthermore, Christians have had the pristine most historically credible witness of documentary evidence provided by the New Testament. In fact “we hypocrites” can look to 500 independent witnesses (i.e. independent from the apostolic witness, which is enough credible witness in and of itself)who not only saw the physical bodily resurrected Jesus–but were still alive when Paul made this assertion in I Cor. 15—thus making his own witness verifiable. Not only that, but the “hypocrites” who penned the synoptic gospels in the first century in their collusion, had women, of all people, as the first witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection–that was smart, since woman’s testimony in the first century counted for nothing; unless of course they actually had seen the risen Savior–imagine that.
Anyway Rev., I’m sure everything I just said is probably lost on you, and if you want to buy into some more Dan Brown inspired sensationalism that’s up to you. By the way, which Jesus’ tomb do you think is the real one, from the Bible, the Jerusalem tomb or the one in India (wait Jesus was from Nazareth)?
HERE’S THE OFFICIA SITE: http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com
If bone material were found in the “Jesus” ossuary, were indications of a crucifixion present? If not, then this would also weigh against the claim as no one denies his crucifixion (excluding Muslims) to my knowledge.
[...] The Coffin and DNA of Jesus (Justin Taylor) [...]
It stands to reason that self proclaimed “I’m the king of the world”, James Cameron would cooperate in a de-throning effort of Jesus
. In a more serious vein though, for many who practice religion, Jesus has been in a tomb all along – He can’t do miracles anymore, He doesn’t speak to us anymore and He certainly doesn’t upset the status quo of our territorial mindsets. People who are looking to dethrone Jesus are lost – they are spiritually starved – they pose no threat to us. Who will be the one to soften their hearts towards the source of their salvation??
My statement is”All of this is and act of discredit created by the army of the uprise group of the {ANTI-CHRIST}. We are living in the endtime period of world destruction that is leading to the end of mankind’I believe and will always believe no mater what lies the devil create. ” JESUS CHRIST IS LORD…….and all who wait on the lord will see.
Rev. Smith, the Cameron crew created the relationship structure for the inscribed ossuaries. As others have mentioned, DNA testing was only done on two. All bones were reburied years ago to appease the hard-line Orthodox Jews, and they were buried in a common grave with many other sets of remains from archaeological digs. These bones could not now be identified if they were recovered. From the “organic residue” tested in the “Jesus” and “Mary Magdalene” ossuaries, no nuclear DNA was found. That is the type of DNA where half comes from each parent. The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) found was not a match between the two individuals. The mtDNA comes exclusively from the mother. It has limited uses to prove relationships, slightly greater uses to disprove them. All we can discern from the non-match of mtDNA here is that the “Mary Magdalene” was not the mother, maternal grandmother, maternal aunt, full sister, half-sister with a common mother, or daughter of a maternal aunt of the “Jesus”. One can’t say they aren’t related. The “Jesus” could be the father, grandfather, paternal uncle or half-brother with a common father but different mother of the “Mary Magdalene”. So the Cameron crew erred when they assumed no relationship, and erred even further when they assumed a marriage. And if there was a marriage that accounted for a non-match, perhaps it was between another combination of individuals in the tomb. I think it highly likely that they did no further testing of the ossuaries because they feared being disproved. The mtDNA results from the Judah ossuary would have had to match the results from “Mary Magdalene”, or the house of cards would collapse. The mtDNA would have had to match between “Mother Mary” and her putative sons, or the theory is demolished. Likewise, there would have to be a match between “Jesus” and his putative brothers.
IT’s a hoax. Not really a hoax but it’s not the tomb. I mean, come on….really. We all claim to believe in the Word and we know there was no body…….
No wife….
No sons….
No daughters….
no marriage….
No truth in the greed of these guys wanting to capitalize on religious people’s curiosity and hopes.
I just have to laugh (lol) when I read this stuff….
james
simonsolutions.com
For a comprehensive and scholarly rebuttal of the film’s evidence please visit ExtremeTheology.com.
Read and hear the evidence for yourself.
Problem stated:- the assumption that Jesus’ family could afford a wealthy burial place such as this;
But that is actually consistent with the Biblical account: a rich man would have a wealthy burial place! And according to the teachings of Jesus, if you follow Jesus, you are a part of his family.
Matthew 27
57 As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. 58 Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. 59 Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 60 and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away.
[...] Christian Responses: Richard Bauckham (and here), Tony Beam, Craig Blomberg, Jon Bloom (and here), Darrell Bock, Sean Boisen, Rick Brannan (and here), Nathan Busenitz (and here), Scott Clark, Ray Comfort, Todd Friel, Mike Heiser, Andreas Köstenberger (and here and here), Scot McKnight, Albert Mohler, John Piper (MP3 interview), James White (and here, here, here, MP3 interview, here, here, here, here, and here), James Emery White, Tyler Williams (and here), and Ben Witherington (and here, here, here, and here). [...]
Lose Sleep???, the notion that a final discovery of our Lord’s final resting place of his remains, and that of his family would surely not shake my faith and my personal relationship with God and his son.
Your words are so driven and forceful to disprove a simple idea without even truly knowing yourself, are you losing sleep?
The overall feeling I get from this article and most I have read on the “Lost Tomb” is that of fear. Relax and let your anxieties rest for all will be known in time.
God Bless all of you…