Jesus Tomb Found

Here is a report on the jame ossuary from .bibleinterp.com by Dr. Rochelle I. Altman who is an expert in specialist in ancient phonetic-based writing systems and was a contributor to the The Ioudaios-L Discussion List which was a community of scholars ( still accessible) engaged in on-line discussion of Judaism in the Greco-Roman world

quote:

---

The inscription has been translated as “Jacob son of Joseph brother of Joshua.”

---

quote:

---

The two parts are not related; the differences between them are striking.

---

quote:

---

The inscription on the “James” ossuary is anomalous. First, it was written by two different people. Second, the scripts are from two different social strata. Third, the first script is a formal inscriptional cursive with added wedges; the second script is partly a commercial cursive and partly archaic cursive. Fourth, it has been gone over by two different carvers of two different levels of competence.

---

quote:

---

Conclusion
If the entire inscription on the ossuary is genuine, then somebody has to explain why there are two hands, two different scripts, two different social strata, two different levels of execution, two different levels of literacy, and two different carvers. They could also explain where the frame has gone.

---

quote:

---

The ossuary itself is undoubtedly genuine; the well-executed and formal first part of the inscription is a holographic original by a literate (and wealthy) survivor of Jacob bar Yosef, probably sometime during the Herodian period. The second part of the inscription bears the hallmarks of a fraudulent later addition, probably around the 3rd or 4th centuries, and is questionable to say the least.

---

All bold mine. go to Official Report on the James OssuaryIt is notIt is because some of us go with the facts that are presented. Some folks easily fall for snake oil salesmen others do not. There in fact may have been a person named jesus, he may have been like his eras Gandhi. But Gandhi Freed His people and led them. Jesus was tried, convicted and executed like a common criminal.Edited by alacrity fitzhugh, : No reason given.

---

six(sic)six

Did they usually crucify people without a conviction

quote:

---

However, from the standpoint of the Sanhedrin, things didn’t go smoothly here either. The penalty for blasphemy was death, but since the Romans had taken away their authority to impose the death penalty, they had to refer Jesus to the Roman authorities. By policy, the Romans didn’t get involved in religious disputes, so the Sanhedrin had to emphasize the fact that the word ”Messiah’ refers to a king, which could be construed as sedition against Rome. Pilate tried to get out of judging Jesus on the technicality that Jesus was from Galilee, so he sent Him to Herod the Tetrarch of Galilee, who was in Jerusalem at the time. Unfortunately for Pilate, Herod sent Jesus back. Finally, after Pilate examined Jesus and found that His kingship was no political threat to Rome, he declared Jesus innocent of any crime (Matthew 27:23, Mark 15:14, Luke 23:13-16, John 18:38). In the end, Pilate bowed to pressure and consented to the crucifixion under protest. But Pilate used the crucifixion to taunt the Sanhedrin. It was customary to place a plaque on the cross over the convict, stating the offense. Pilate did not write, “Claimed to be King of the Jews,” instead he wrote, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” (John 19:19-22) In this way, Pilate showed his sympathies were with Jesus, not the Sanhedrin.

---

Ken Collins web site-Who Crucified Jesus?By consenting, he convicted even if it was with him protesting against it.'Edited by alacrity fitzhugh, : No reason given.

I said he was convicted. And he was convicted of blasphemy by Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. he was executed by the Romans because Rome had stripped the power to enforce the death penalty from the Sanhedrin. Whether or not Pilate thought he was guilty does not change the fact that he was convicted ( by Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin) and executed by the romans as a criminal.On another note- the trail account is seen as fictitious.

quote:

---

The gospel accounts so transparently attempt to present the chief priests--and not Pilate--as the more blameworthy party that scholars have raised numerous questions about their accuracy. Scholars have paid special attention to the incentives of Mark because he wrote theearliest of the four gospel accounts in the Bible, and Matthew, Luke, and (to a lesser extent) John based their accounts on his. The scholars point out that Mark--writing at a time of Roman prosecution of Christians and for a largely non-Jewish audience--had incentives to present a story that would minimize the risk of condemnation by Roman authorities and maximize his prospects for winning converts to Christianity from among the Romans in his audience. How could Mark, these scholars ask, possibly have known what Pilate "wondered" about Jesus' guilt or what he "perceived" about the purposes of high priests? The Trial of Jesus: An Account

---

You want to use the post from an Native American atheist to argue against a degreed biblical scholar

---

six(sic)six

And all I'm writing is that he was convicted. Whether Pilate did this or not would be logically deduced by the history of what the romans did in these instances. Being convicted by the Sanhedrin and having the punishment carried out by the Romans has you conclued this how? Where did I say the jews were scape-goated? A more plausable explanation would be that pilate was using one group against the other. . My original post was to nj in the fact that he has a habit of seeing people who disagree with him as indication of bias against his position/religion. I was pointing out that it is not just atheist who feel that the ossaury inscription is false but people who are not , as he feels, biased. I was also pointing out that just because someone feels your religion has no merit does not mean that said person does not believe certain historical people may have existed. for all I now jesus did exist, but the claim that he was the son of god is the part I contest.

---

six(sic)six