More thoughts about the Jesus bones....

All these questions are around here and here is a good view.

Well, one of my best friends John (who does not blog anymore...but takes great photos here) posts a few comments on the Jesus bones stuff.... Just FYI....

Here are the few things he had to say (and Thanks john before I forget!! Seriously, Thanks!:

Discovery Channel's web site has two original articles that should lay the whole thing to rest - first is a catalog of first century ossuaries; second is the original excavation report.

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/tomb/explore/media/tomb_evidence.pdf

I haven't looked at much of what others are saying, but the critiques are generally weak. NT Wright is great, of course, but his argument work only if one shares his perspective on the issue. Otherwise, it just adds more fuel to the conspiracy.

So here are a couple of significant factors:
1) the names are common, and I think that both the ossuary catalog and Kloner's article touch on those issues. A Jewish guy named Yehudah? That's like an Scottish guy names Scott, a French guy named Francois, you get the point.

2) the reading of the name is "Jesus" (Yeshua) is highly questionable. Kloner reconstructs the name on the basis of another ossuary that identifies a Yeshua as the father of Yehuda, but there is no empirical evidence that the ossuaries are related in any way.

3) the whole bit about the cross being etched into the stone in front of Jesus' name...it's barely a cross, and can be easily explained as scratches, or erasures, cracks or...

So yeah, another great example of why archeology, whether it's used for or against Christianity, is more art than science. And, a fantastic reminder that a little knowledge (emphasis on the little) is more dangerous than ignorance.