Burial artifact of James the Just found?

[Dr Mordrid]

A burial amulet inscribed (in Aramaic) "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" dated to ~63 AD; the time when James, who led the early chuch at the time, was martyred

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/breaking/10_21_02jesus.html

James, AKA: James the Just, is documented in several references;

http://www.uncc.edu/jdtabor/jamessources.html

Interesting....

Dr. Mordrid

[SpiralDragon]

very intresting

[Gurm]

Erm, so this guy is Jesus... Nephew?

Or his brother?

I'm unclear.

If it's supposed to be his brother, then it's unlikely that he lived to 63 years old - life expectancy back then was like 45.

- Gurm

P.S. Ok, actually if it were his MUCH YOUNGER brother, then I could maybe see it. Maybe if he were 10 years younger... then he'd only be 53, yeah?

[Wombat]

It's unlikely that Jesus was born 2002 years ago anyway. The year is generally accepted to be off.

[Gurm]

*shrug*

So is carbon dating. A properly doctored LIVING horseshoe crab can be carbon dated to 10,000 BC.

- Gurm

[Gurm]

Yeah it IS supposedly his brother. I maintain that it's later than James was likely to be alive.

Additionally, everyone is saying that it says "Jesus" on the tomb. Wouldn't it have to say... err... trying to remember the Hebrew equivalent...?

Heh.

Also, the rest of the family weren't particularly PROUD of the Messiah. While legend maintains that his brother went on to lead the church in Jerusalem, it's kinda doubtful. Remember that Jesus was a renegade rabbi, VERY black-sheep sort of thing.

- Gurm

[Gurm]

You will note that between this post and the previous one there was a post by SolidMammaries.

It was deleted. I wonder by whom?

- Gurm

[KRSESQ]

Another link, with Aramaic translation:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20021021/jesus.html

""The 20 Aramaic letters etched on a side of the newly revealed ossuary read "Ya'akov bar Yosef akhui di Yoshua," or "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." ""

Guy had to be buried SOMEWHERE.

Kevin

[Gurm]

Note however that the ossuary was EMPTY.

- Gurm

[KvHagedorn]

Give it up, Gurm.. you're spinning your wheels upstairs.. it's perfectly possible for someone to have lived to be 63 back then. Yes, James was Jesus' younger brother, so he would have been less than this age. I think they have revised Jesus' year of birth to something like 4 A.D. now, so that puts James at 59 maximum at age of death. Now, Augustus lived about the same time as Jesus and lived to be 77 years old (when he was killed by poisoning.)

Nothing personal, but your logic has been pretty off lately.. just because the average life expectancy was 45 back then (I will overlook the fact that none of us can really prove this conclusively) doesn't mean someone couldn't live to be older, does it?

Another bit of illogic.. James and those around him were Christians, so those who buried him were not going to be ashamed of this. You really need to proof what you say before posting it.

All this aside, it's possible the whole thing might be a hoax..

[KRSESQ]

'Average life expectancy' is a misleading term. The average life expectancy for that era was so low because the infant mortality rate was so appallingly high. It doesn't preclude someone in decent health living to a ripe old age.

Kevin

[Dr Mordrid]

Give it up guys....James existed and the circumstances and date of his martyrdom are accepted fact.

This is mostly because Josephus Flavius, a scribe of first century Palestine, recorded things in excruciating detail....including the martyrdom of James.

Josephus documents this specific incident in his Antiquities 20. 9.1 199-203;

"Possessed of such a character, Ananus thought that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus was dead and Albinas was still on the way. And so he convened the judges of the Sanhedrin, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the one called Christ, whose name was James, and certain others, and accusing them of having transgressed the law delivered them up to be stoned."

James is also mentioned in the Gospel of Thomas 12;

"The Disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist"."

and Galatians 1:19;

"But I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord's brother."

Also: the family was very much supportive. In fact one of Jesus's cousins, Symeon, succeeded James as the Bishop of Jerusalem. He to was martyred during the reign of the Roman emperor Tragan.

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

I notice someone is FINALLY getting around to zapping subpar's posts. Excellent.

- Gurm

P.S. Doc - normally I wouldn't argue with you but...

*ahem*

There is no "Gospel of Thomas". At least not in MY bible (King James Edition), and not in my parents' bible (original hebrew old testament and greek new testament).

I assume it's either in a Catholic Bible, a Dead Sea Scroll, or the Apocryphia. Either way, it's considered non-canonical and highly suspect.

Add to that the use of "brother" to refer to just about everyone, and the fact that although James is a disciple it never says anything about Jesus going home to pick him up... and you pretty much have a recipe for "hearsay".

P.P.S. OH I SHOULD HAVE SEEN IT... one of his cousins succeeded his brother as the "Bishop" of Jerusalem?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Priests, Bishops, Cardinals, and Popes are a DARK AGES invention. Didn't come about until hundreds of years later, guy. Nice Catholic fact-checking there.

[_hSUBpar_]

Spurm as usual you have no clue what you speak of, it being a LIE!

James is the true SON of OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR, as to say a LIE of the TRUTH!

For none shall know the secret and hidden, or so I can only pray and hope. And shall they then see the TRUTH???

You are a sad and confused man. I hope that you someday can learn, and until then I shall call you SPURM!

[Jammrock]

Hmmm....

Actually, it is commonly thought that Joseph and Mary had several other children, boys and girls, after Jesus was born. Gospel of Matthew 13:54-56, "54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?"

Crossreferencing that with John 2:12, "12 ¶ After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days." Notice how they distinctly differentiate the difference between his brethren and his disciples.

That and the previously mentioned Josephus documents make at least a strong case.

As for why the bones werent' in there...from what the news reports I have seen have all said, this thing has made a journey or two around the black market, which is the biggest ding against the discovery, and could thus be the big factor as to why it was empty. People in it for the money don't care what's inside, so they probably dumped it.

Jammrock