Re: Ossuary

From: Michael Roberts (
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 17:58:07 EST

  • Next message: Michael Roberts: "Re: joshua"

    Surely the best historical response is that the ossuary is good
    circumstantial evidence but not proof.

    It does upset minimalists who want to discredit any history in the bible.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Ted Davis" <>
    To: <>
    Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:02 PM
    Subject: Ossuary

    > My brother, an ancient historian and archaeologist specializing in the
    > Middle East, saw the "James" ossuary in Toronto last month. He believes
    > "the same hand did the inscription. Not based on letter forms, but on the
    > tool used to carve it and the depth of the letters. If it is a fake, who
    > benefits? if it was an ancient fake, then it would have been placed in a
    > reliquary and a church built over it. If a modern fake, it would have sold
    > for more than $300!"
    > This hardly proves that it came from the tomb of the biblical James, but
    > the possibility is an obvious one.
    > Ted Davis

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Dec 11 2002 - 00:14:35 EST