The James Ossury

[_aussieguy55]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBivRgRXGgQ

[_aussieguy55]

Might be a fake

[_EmilyAnn]

It was my understanding that the "James ossuary" itself has been determined to be genuine...but the inscription is a fairly contemporary forgery.

There is still debate on this because much depends on the inscription's date-appropriate authenticity to many Christians and to those in the antiquities business who would benefit/are benefitting if the inscription DOES turn out to be genuine.

My opinion, based on what I have read of the scientific tests, is that the inscription is modern, and was then chemically, etc. "aged" to APPEAR ancient (but not done well enough to pass the scientific tests).

Google: "James ossuary" for a full selection of both sides of the issue.

There is a major religion, and many reputations, careers (and, possibly, freedom from incarceration--or NOT) at stake here. In the antiquities/archaeological field, this is a hugely important dispute.

[_kairos]

as fake as the Book of Abraham! 'nough said.

[_Nevo]

as fake as the Book of Abraham! 'nough said.

Glad you think so, because there's a good chance that the inscription is genuine.

[_kairos]

sorry to burst your bubble- after wreiting an article in the biblical archeology review, Herschel shanks was fooled then had to recant after testing of the inscription which has been debunked as of the common era, like several years not thousands of years old.

where is joseph when we need to determine if bones, bows and arrows, plates oor ossuaries etc are authentic?

no bullseye here!

[_Bret Ripley]

sorry to burst your bubble- after wreiting an article in the biblical archeology review, Herschel shanks was fooled then had to recant

Can you provide a cite for this? I was under the impression that Shanks still thinks the inscription may be authentic.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

sorry to burst your bubble- after wreiting an article in the biblical archeology review, Herschel shanks was fooled then had to recant

Can you provide a cite for this? I was under the impression that Shanks still thinks the inscription may be authentic.

According to Wikipedia, there was a study done this year that suggests that the inscription might be authentic:

A 2014 study by Amnon Rosenfeld, Howard R. Feldman, Wolfgang E. Krumbein in the Open Journal of Geology found that patina on the ossuary surface matched that in the engravings. Furthermore, the group found microfossils and other biological indicators in the inscription supporting the authenticity engravings.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ossuary

[_Nevo]

sorry to burst your bubble- after wreiting an article in the biblical archeology review, Herschel shanks was fooled then had to recant

Can you provide a cite for this? I was under the impression that Shanks still thinks the inscription may be authentic.

Shanks absolutely thinks the inscription is authentic. See, e.g., Shanks, "Oded's Other Ossuary," BAR (March/April 2014): 6; "'Brother of Jesus' Inscription is Authentic!" BAR (July/August 2012): 26–33, 62, 64.

[_Bret Ripley]

According to Wikipedia, there was a study done this year that suggests that the inscription might be authentic:

A 2014 study by Amnon Rosenfeld, Howard R. Feldman, Wolfgang E. Krumbein in the Open Journal of Geology found that patina on the ossuary surface matched that in the engravings. Furthermore, the group found microfossils and other biological indicators in the inscription supporting the authenticity engravings.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ossuary

Huh. Well that's more interesting than whatever Shanks may think about it. Up to this point I've been skeptical about the authenticity of the inscription, but I'll have to take a look at this new study. Thanks, Liz!