Asking the Experts about Jesus’ Lost Tomb

By Nathan Busenitz @ http://www.sfpulpit.com

Last night, the Discovery Channel aired it’s controversial “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.” Much has already been said about the so-called evidence presented by James Cameron and company. Today, we wanted to simply provide a list of quotes from leading scholars (both Christian and non-Christian) regarding their thoughts on the documentary.

We should note, at the outset, that our confidence in the reality of Christ’s resurrection does not rest on the findings of contemporary scholars, archeologists, or historians. It rests in the authoritative testimony of Scripture. Nonetheless, in light of the egregious claims made by this documentary, it is helpful to review some of the sharp criticism that it has both received and deserved. (Special thanks to Todd Bolen, professor at The Master’s College’s Israel Bible Extension campus, for his pointing us to many of these sources through his blog.)

*****

I. REGARDING THE OVERALL PREMISE OF THE DOCUMENTARY:

Prof. Amos Kloner, Israeli archeologist who oversaw the original discovery of the ossuaries:

It makes a great story for a TV film. But it’s completely impossible. It’s nonsense. (Online Source)

Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:

Well, it is only startling in terms of the sensationalism…. You are talking about a tomb that was discovered, as you said, well over two decades ago. The archaeologists there in Israel, who are the closest to this, have the greatest expertise, are not only looking at this with skepticism, but basically dismissing its claims. (Online Source)

Dr. Jodi Magness, Department of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill:

If Jesus’ family had been wealthy enough to afford a rock-cut tomb, it would have been in Nazareth, not Jerusalem… This whole case (for the tomb of Jesus) is flawed from beginning to end’ (Online Source)

And elsewhere:

The entire way this has been done has been an injustice to the entire discipline [of archaelogy] and also to the public. (Online Source)

Dr. William Dever, professor emeritus, University of Arizona:

The fact that it’s been ignored [since 1980] tells you something. It would be amusing if it didn’t mislead so many people. (Online Source)

And elsewhere:

It’s a publicity stunt, and it will make these guys very rich, and it will upset millions of innocent people because they don’t know enough to separate fact from fiction. (Online Source)

Dr. Leen Ritmeyer, biblical archeologist, Associate Professor at the College of Archaeology & Biblical History, TSW University:

It would have to be an archaeologist’s worst nightmare. Imagine — your careful academic work, as was Amos Kloner’s supervision of the tomb’s excavation for the IAA (Israel Antiquities Authority) in 1980 — hijacked by Hollywood. And that to produce a sensationalist documentary…. It is possibly the most cynical claim yet to be made in the field of Biblical Archaeology and only serves to give the subject a bad name. (Online Source)

Dr. Aren Maeir, Director of the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archeological Project and a lecturer at the Martin (Szusz) Department of Land of Israel Studies at Bar Ilan University:

Since, along with, most probably, the majority of archaeologists who deal with the ancient Levant, I have been asked about the question of the supposed tomb of Jesus and his family …, I thought that I should join the very clear message of the responsible archaeological community and say — this is HOGWASH!! (excuse my French!). (Online Source)

Dr. Laurence Stager, Professor of the Archeology of Israel at Harvard University:

From what I know about it at this moment, it sounds rather preposterous. (Online Source)

David Mevorah, Curator of the Israel Museum:

[Any theory that] this tomb was a tomb of the family of Jesus is a farfetched suggestion, and we need to be very careful with that. (Online Source)

Prof. L. Michael White, Director of the Institute for the Study of Antiquity and Christian Origins, Univeristy of Texas:

This is not archeologically sound. This is fanfare. (Online Source)

According to the Washington Post:

Leading archaeologists in Israel and the United States have denounced the purported discovery of the tomb of Jesus as a publicity stunt. (Online Source)

*****

II. REGARDING THE NAMES IN THE TOMB

Prof. Amos Kloner, Israeli archeologist who first catalogued the ossuaries:

The name “Jesus son of Joseph” has been found on three or four ossuaries. These are common names. There were huge headlines in the 1940s surrounding another Jesus ossuary, cited as the first evidence of Christianity. There was another Jesus tomb. Months later it was dismissed. Give me scientific evidence, and I’ll grapple with it. But this is manufactured. (Online Source)

Dr. Paul Maier, Department of History, Western Michigan University:

All the names – Yeshua, Joseph, Maria, Mariamene, Matia, Judah, and Jose – are extremely frequent Jewish names for that time and place, and thus most scholars consider this merely coincidental, as they did from the start. One-quarter of Jewish women at that time, for example, were named Maria. (Online Source)

Dr. Ben Witherington III, Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary:

We have absolutely no historical evidence to suggest Mary Magdalene would have been called by a Greek name before A.D. 70. She grew up in a Jewish fishing village called Migdal, not a Greek city at all. It makes no sense that her ossuary would have a Greek inscription and that of her alleged husband an Aramaic inscription. … Mary Magdalene is called ‘Maria’ constantly in first century Christian literature, and indeed well into the second century as well. She is never called Mariamene or the like. … The second word on the Mariamene ossuary is Mara which is short for Martha another female name. It is not a reference to her being a master or teacher. … Jesus is never called ‘son of Joseph’ by anyone who knew him intimately in the NT — not by his family members, and not by his disciples. (Online Source)

Dr. Richard Bauckum, Professor of New Testament Studies, St. Mary’s College, University of St. Andrews, Scotland:

[After an extensive linguistic treatment, Dr. Bauckum concludes:] There is no reason at all to connect the woman in this ossuary with Mary Magdalene, and in fact the name usage is decisively against such a connexion.” (Online Source)

Dr. Andreas Kostenberger, Professor of New Testament and Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary:

The claim that Mary Magdalene’s bones were found in one of the ossuaries on the basis that the name “Mariamne” (Mary) is inscribed on it is bogus; the connection drawn here is pulled completely out of thin air. [Moreover,] If you had been Jesus and (for argument’s sake) had had a son, would you have named him Judas (same as Judah or Jude), like the man who betrayed you? (Online Source)

Dr. Stephen Pfann, President of Jerusalem’s University of the Holy Land and an expert in Semitic languages:

I don’t think it [the “Jesus” ossuary] says Yehoshua. It says Hanun or something. … [In any case,] the idea that the originator of a religion like [Christianity] would end up in such a plain ossuary is kind of telling as to whether this is really potentially the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth or not. (Online Source)

Dr. Dan Bahat, Israeli archeologist currently with the University of Toronto:

Yeshua was such a popular name during the Second Temple Period. The fact that you have such similar names is due to the fact that these were the prevalent names during that time. (Online Source)

Dr. Charles L. Quarles, Chair of Christian Studies, Louisianna University:

Even by the calculations of the authors of The Jesus Family Tomb [the book that parallels the documentary], there were approximately 1,008 men named Jesus, son of Joseph who lived in first-century Palestine! They calculate that 1 out of every 79 Jewish males in Palestine during the century of ossuary use was named “Jesus, son of Joseph!” (Online Source)

*****

III. REGARDING THE DNA EVIDENCE

Dr. Carney Matheson, Lakehead University Paleo-DNA Laboratory, the one who did the DNA testing for the filmmakers:

The only conclusions we made was that these two sets [from the “Yeshua” and “Mariamne” ossuaries] were not maternally related. To me it sounds like absolutely nothing. (Online Source)

Elsewhere, Matheson noted that possible relationships (which DNA cannot establish) could be:

…father and daughter, paternal cousins, half brother and sister (sharing the same father) or simply unrelated individuals. The media does what they want. (Online Source)

And elsewhere:

There is a statement in the film that has been taken out of context. While marriage is a possibility, other relationships like father and daughter, paternal cousins, sister-in-law or indeed two unrelated individuals [are also possible]… (Source: Discovery Channel debate with Ted Koppel which followed the documentary on Sunday night)

Dr. Darrell Bock, Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary:

There is the DNA showing that Mariamne and Jesus DNA residue do not match. Now with how many women in Judea would Jesus’ DNA not match? Even women named Mary/Mariamne? This proves nothing. … In fact, the fact that only two boxes were tested means that we do not even know if this is a family tomb, since the two tested show no relationship. The DNA could prove the exact opposite of what is being claimed. (Online Source)

Dr. James White, Christian apologist, Director of Alpha and Omega Ministries:

One of the main “tests” I had in mind for this book [The Jesus Family Tomb] when I picked it up was this: Will the book honestly discuss the limitations of mitochondrial DNA? Will they admit that such analysis can only speak to maternal relations, not to paternal relations? Will they tell us what Dr. Carney Matheson has confirmed that such a test cannot rule out that Yeshua ben Yosef was the father of Mariamne? Or will they spin the results? The answer was: spin, spin, spin. (Online Source)

Dr. Al Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:

The DNA testing is to me the most laughable aspect of all of this. I mean, frankly, there could be a thousand, thousand different explanations for whatever DNA pattern they could find. (Online Source)

Dr. Gary Habermas, Chair of the Department of Philosophy and Theology, Liberty University:

The ONLY THING the DNA evidence establishes positively is that this “Jesus” and this “Mariamene” found in the tomb are not maternally related. This hardly shows that they were probably married! So this is only a guess. She could have been married to any one of the four men, or to other family members, or she could someone’s daughter. We must remember that family tombs were from extended families and were often multi-generational. So, Mariamene could have lived decades earlier or later than Jesus. (Online Source)

*****

IV. REGARDING THE STATISTICAL EVIDENCE

Prof. Andrey Feuerverger, statistician used by the filmmakers:

I must work from the interpretations given to me, and the strength of the calculations are based on those assumptions… If for some reason one were to read it [the name “Mariamene”] as just a regular form of the name Maria, in that case, the calculation produced is not as impressive, and the statistical significance would wash out considerably. (Source: Discovery Channel debate with Ted Koppel which followed the documentary on Sunday night. For more on the name “Mariamene” see Dr. Bauckum’s article here.)

Dr. Mark Goodacre, Associate Professor of New Testament, Duke University:

The major part of the case that the Talpiot tomb is Jesus’ family tomb is based on a statistical claim. … I think this case is severely flawed. The essential problem, as I see it, is that the matches between the Talpiot tomb and the early Christian literary record are factored into the calculations in a positive way, but the non-matches are simply ignored, or treated as neutral. This will not do. … In short, including Mariamne and leaving out Matia and Judas son of Jesus is problematic for any claim to be made about the remaining cluster. All data must be included. You cannot cherry pick or manipulate your data before doing your statistical analysis. (Online Source)

David Mevorah, curator of the Israel Museum:

[The chances this is real] are more than remote. They are closer to fantasy. … [Their statistics are] a good trick. … Statistics can bring empires down or build them up. But I wouldn’t build a theory of the most important person of the first century on statistics.” (Online Source)

Dr. Claude Mariottini, Professor of Old Testament, Northern Baptist Seminary:

Only gullible people can believe Cameron’s claim. In a recent interview on television, Jacobovici said that there is a statistical probability that this is the real tomb where Christ was buried. A person can manipulate numbers and arrive at almost any preconceived conclusion. You cannot prove historical claims by using statistics. (Online Source)

Dr. Charles L. Quarles, Chair of Christian Studies, Louisianna University:

[After an extensive treatment of the statistical probability of these names, Dr. Quarles notes that:] Approximately 1 out of 442 families in Palestine in this period were a Jesus, son of Joseph with close relatives named Mary and Jose/Joseph. … Consequently, the statistical argument does not prove at all that the Jesus of the ossuary is Jesus of Nazareth. It is neither statistically impossible nor improbable that this Jesus is another Jesus. (Online Source)

Dr. Tal Ilan, scholar who compiled the Lexicon of Jewish Names that was essential to the statistical calculations put forward by the documentary:

I think it [the lexicon] was completely mishandled. I am angry. (Online Source)

According to Yahoo! News:

The Israel Antiquities Authority declined to comment [about the recent documentary]. But in 1996 a spokesman said that the probability of the caskets belonging to the family of Jesus were ‘next to zero’. (Online Source)

For more on the improbable nature of these statistics, see here.

*****

V. REGARDING THE MISSING ”JAMES” OSSUARY

Robert Genna, Suffolk Co. Crime Lab Directory, who tested the patina samples for the film:

The elemental composition of some of the samples we tested from the ossuaries are consistent with each other. But I would never say they’re a match… No scientist would ever say definitively that one ossuary came from the same tomb as another… We didn’t do enough sampling to see if in fact there were other tombs that had similar elemental compositions… The only samples we can positively say are a ‘match’ from a single source are fingerprints and DNA. (Source: Discovery Channel debate with Ted Koppel which followed the documentary on Sunday night)

Prof. Amos Kloner, Israeli archeologist who first catalogued the ossuaries:

[When asked: What of the assertion that the 10th ossuary disappeared from your care and may be none other than the “James” ossuary?, Kloner responded:] Nothing has disappeared. The 10th ossuary was on my list. The measurements were not the same (as the James ossuary). It was plain (without an inscription). We had no room under our roofs for all the ossuaries, so unmarked ones were sometimes kept in the courtyard (of the Rockefeller Museum). (Online Source)

Dr. Joe Zias, Paleopathologist at Hebrew University, archeologist who worked with Amos Kloner on the original find:

Amos Kloner is right as I received and catalogued the objects, the 10th was plain and I put it out in the courtyard with all the rest of the plain ossuaries as was the standard procedure when one has little storage space available. Nothing was stolen nor missing and they [the filmmakers] were fully aware of this fact, just didn’t fit in with their agenda. (Online Source)

Dr. Dan Bahat, Israeli archeologist currently with the University of Toronto:

I don’t think the James Ossuary came from the same cave. If it were found there, the man who made the forgery would have taken something better. He would have taken Jesus. (Online Source)

Dr. Mark Goodacre, Duke University, quoting John Poirer:

Another thing that doesn’t add up are the dimensions of the ossuaries in question. As I posted on this list on Oct 8, 2006, Tabor’s claim that “the dimensions of the missing tenth ossuary [from the Talpiot tomb] are precisely the same, to the centimeter, to those of the James Ossuary” is bogus. *BAR* lists the dimensions of the James ossuary as 50.5 cm x 25 cm x 30.5 cm, while the report on the Talpiot tomb published in *Atiqot* 29 (1996) 15-22, lists the tenth ossuary as measuring 60 cm x 26 cm x 30 cm. (Online Source)

Dr. Ben Witherington III, Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary:

Much is made of the fact that the chemical analysis of the patina on the James ossuary and some of the ossuaries in the Talpiot tomb match up. This is not actually surprising at all since you can find terra rosa in various locales in and around Jerusalem. This analysis cannot prove that these ossuaries all came from the same place or were interred in the same spot. Terra rosa is not a soil specific to the Talpiot region! (Online Source)

*****

VI. REGARDING THE SCHOLASTIC CREDIBILITY OF THE PRODUCERS

Dr. Paul Maier, Department of History, Western Michigan University:

Please note the extreme bias of the director and narrator, Simcha Jacobovici. The man is an Indiana-Jones-wannabe, who oversensationalizes anything he touches. … As for James Cameron, how do you follow The Titanic? Well, with an even more “titanic” story. He should have known better. (Online Source)

Bruce Feiler, non-Christian author of Walking the Bible:

And therein is the truth of this tale: This exploitation of quasi-science is hardly new, but it’s still tawdry. The bottom line: There is more truth in Dan Brown’s fiction than in James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovichi’s fact. (Online Source)

Dr. Garret G. Fagan, Professor of Classics at Penn State University:

They’re not scientists, but they need to dress themselves in the clothes of science to pass muster… Television is not in the business of education, even with the so-called educational channels like Discovery. “Ultimately, they’re in the business of making money. … By the time the rebuttals come out, the mass media would have moved on to the next sensation and people will have this vague notion that they have found the tomb of Jesus. (Online Source)

Dr. Christopher Heard, Associate Professor of Religion, Pepperdine University:

Barely a year after misdating artifacts and misinterpreting texts (including the Bible) willy-nilly to try to convince viewers that the biblical exodus from Egypt really happened (albeit not like the Bible narrates it), James Cameron, Simcha Jacobovici, and Charles Pellegrino are back to try to convince us that a tomb unearthed in 1980 is “The Jesus Family Tomb.” … Jacobovici never let a fact get in the way of a good theory before. Why start now? (Online Source)