wu :: forums - Print Page


    
      
        wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> general problem-solving / chatting / whatever >> Jesus Family Tomb?
        
(Message started by: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot on Feb 27^th, 2007, 7:57pm)

Title: Jesus Family Tomb?
Post by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot on Feb 27^th, 2007, 7:57pm

A new documentary, to be aired in March, claims proof that a set of ossuaries found in 1980 once contained the remains of the family of Jesus.

Here's a link (http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/86015/Jesus_Debate_Rekindled.html?page=3) to an interview with the producer and investigative journalist.

Title: Re: Jesus Family Tomb?
Post by BNC on Feb 27^th, 2007, 10:55pm

The archiologist who discovered the tombs was asked about it in a recent newspaper story about the documentary, and said that even without watching the movie, he can say that these are mere speculations.

Title: Re: Jesus Family Tomb?
Post by Icarus on Feb 28^th, 2007, 6:00pm

The only evidence they have that this is Jesus is that the one ossuary says "Jesus, son of Joseph", while the other says "Mary". However, all three names were very common in that age (there are at least 7 different Marys mentioned in the New Testament alone, and "Jesus" is the same name as "Joshua", but has come to english by a different route - names of great biblical heroes were even more popular then than they are now).

Also, I've heard that you have to sort of squint and hold your tongue just right to see the faded name as "Jesus" instead of "Joachim".

In other words, the thing is all about sensationalism, and has nothing to do with real science or history.

Title: Re: Jesus Family Tomb?
Post by azalia on Feb 28^th, 2007, 7:30pm

I think it's just a film maker trying to make a name for himself. But I'm curious what you think of their statistical analysis. I quote:
In a study, Feuerverger examined the cluster of names in the tomb.
• This involved multiplying the instances that each name appeared during that time period with the instances of every other name.
• To be conservative, he then divided the number by the statistical standard of 4 (or 25%) to allow for unintentional biases in the historical sources.
• He then further divided the results by 1,000 to account for all tombs that may have existed in First Century Jerusalem.
Taking into account the chances that these names would be clustered together in a family tomb, this statistical study concludes that the odds – on the most conservative basis – are 600 to 1 in favor of this being the JESUS FAMILY TOMB. A statistical probability of 600 to 1 means that this conclusion works 599 times out of 600.

STATISTICS TABLE
FREQUENCY OF NAMES
INITIAL COMPUTATION
Jesus Son of Joseph
1 in 190
Mariamne
1 in 160
Matia
1 in 40
Yose
1 in 20
Maria
1 in 4
(Eliminating Matia since he is not explicatively mentioned in the Gospels)
= 1/2,400,000
THIRD COMPUTATION (Adjusting for unintentional biases in the historical sources)
2,400,000 ÷ 4
FOURTH COMPUTATION (Adjust for all possible First Century Jerusalem Tombs)
600,000 ÷ 1,000
PROBABILITY FACTOR = 600 to 1

My first question is, shouldn't that number be downgraded on the basis of
1) an additional unrelated name (Matthew)
2) an additional unsubstantiated name (Judah son of Jesus)
3) an inexact name (Jose instead of the Biblical Joses, or possibly Joseph)
4) an ambiguous name (Jesus is just some vague scratches, read by some as Hunan, which is interpreted as Jesus only because they are guessing he's the same person referred to as the father of Judah)

And secondly, am I correct that a proper statistical analysis wouldn't just compute the probabilities of these specific names showing up together, but rather they should calculate the probability that any one of the many combinations of people Jesus could have been buried with might have been located?

The tomb supposedly had 35 bodies, 18 just lying around and theoretically 1.7 bodies on average in each of 10 ossuaries, only 6 of which had names. So how about the probability that out of 35 names, only recording 6 of them, that the right 5 would be present to make this hypothetical family tomb identified as it was.

Title: Re: Jesus Family Tomb?
Post by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot on Feb 28^th, 2007, 9:11pm

on 02/28/07 at 18:00:28, Icarus wrote:

In other words, the thing is all about sensationalism, and has nothing to do with real science or history.

That's what I thought, too. That's what most archaeologists are saying as well. I was interested to see reactions to the "data" they were presenting. For example, 99% sure that it is Jesus' family? Where on earth did they come up with this number?

The only information they presented that I found even slightly compelling was the presence of the name Mariamne on one of the ossuaries. It is still a relatively common name but it is thought to be the name Mary Magdelene would have gone by. Still, I agree. A load of sensational rubbish.