March 18, 2007

Hello,

What you are now looking at is the notes that I took as I watched the show “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” that aired on the Discovery Channel on March 4, 2007.  You will notice times in parentheses, for example (1:15).  These refer to the elapsed time that a particular point occurred during the documentary.

I believe that I have found 33 assumptions that one needs to accept before you can agree with the documentary’s findings.  You will also find many quotes from the internet & the Bible (usually the New Living Translation).  Pretty much all of the quotes have the corresponding web links for you to check them out for yourself.  All of the quotes belong to the people who said them.  I just simply pulled them together.

As I said, you are looking at my notes.  Please ignore the typos and grammatical errors as I am certainly not a great typist - especially when I am typing fast enough to keep up with a TV show.  These notes are in a very rough form, but I am not going to edit them any further.  I am not planning on spending anymore time on this issue.

May Jesus, the one who physically rose from the dead, richly bless you and your family,

Pastor Jim Bradford

=========================================

The Lost Tomb of Jesus….
my notes….

Despite widespread ridicule from scholars, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" drew more than 4 million viewers when it aired on the Discovery Channel on March 4.

A companion book, "The Jesus Family Tomb," has rocketed to sixth place on The New York Times nonfiction best-seller list.

By the way, this film is the second documentary done on this tomb. The BBC did one in 1996 on the same tomb.

About 900 similar tombs have been found within a 2.5-mile (4-kilometer) radius of Jerusalem's Old City. 
over a thousand ossuaries were found… only 20% of them had names written on them.

Why?  The names were NOT written so the public could identify the bones.  The names were written ONLY so the family would know who was were when they rearranged the room.  Perhaps like how we label boxes in our attic.  That’s why they say, “Mary” etc.  It’s not about the world figuring out who was who - Just those who already knew who “Mary” was.  Like us labeling, “Uncle Joe.”

Their Findings:
The Ossuaries Without Inscriptions
The inscriptions on the ossuaries found in the Talpiot Tomb in 1980 by a bulldozer read as follows: 
Ossuary 80/500: “Mariamene e Mara” – “Mariamne, also called Master” 
Ossuary 80/501: “Yehuda bar Yeshua” – “Judah, son of Jesus” 
Ossuary 80/502: “Matia” – “Matthew” 
Ossuary 80/503 “Yeshua bar Yosef” – “Jesus, Son of Joseph” 
Ossuary 80/504 “Yose” or “Yosa” – a nickname for “Joseph” 
Ossuary 80/505: “Maria” – a Latinized version of the Hebrew “Miriam.” 
Of the ten ossuaries pulled from the niches of the burial chamber, inscriptions were recorded as occurring on six, a very high ratio considering that only 20% of the thousands of ossuaries ever found bear such inscriptions. 
Ossuaries 80/506-508 were plain, with no inscriptions. 
And no one knows anything really about Ossuary 80/509. It disappeared before it could be checked for inscriptions or ornamentation. 
http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/the_tomb/unnamed_ossuaries.html

=================
Six of the ten ossuaries have epigraphs carved into them. Various interperetations of these epigraphs are currently being debated by scholars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talpiot_Tomb

Assumption 1 - Matthew was lying about the resurrection
Matthew stated that the Pharisees circulated the story that the disciple stole the body..
	Why?  To cover up the resurrection story.

The writers say, Perhaps the disciples really did steal the body
	Why? in order to give Jesus a proper burial

If that was true, there would be NO REASON to even talk about the resurrection!  They would have just buried Jesus like the buried everybody else!  And left flowers at his grave!

Jesus was their friend and teacher - NOT THE FOUNDER OF THE WORLD’S LARGEST RELIGIOUS SYSTEM THAT THEY WOULD HELP TO SPREAD!

WHY CALL IT A CONSPIRACY?
Because Conspiracy sells!  There’s BIG money in conspiracy!
Ever heard of …
AREA 51?
Hitler not really being killed by the Russians?
John F Kennedy was really killed by the CIA?
Jose Conseco - revealing the dirt in baseball

Side note: 
Despite widespread ridicule from scholars, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" drew more than 4 million viewers when it aired on the Discovery Channel on March 4.

A companion book, "The Jesus Family Tomb," has rocketed to sixth place on The New York Times nonfiction best-seller list.

Assumption 2 - The attendance Jesus’ Burial Ceremony

1 year after his death….
they would have returned to give Jesus’ bones a proper burial.

The writers name those who were at the burial ceremony.
	Mary (his Mother)
	Mary Magdelene
His brothers… Simon, Joseph, Judah, & James

- How on earth can you say WHO was at the ceremony???

Why names Mary Magdalene as being in attendance?  Because this helps to support her being FAMILY!

There is NO EVIDENCE for any of this.

Joseph, Mary, and their son Jesus were a poor family from Nazareth. There is no proof they even lived in Jerusalem

According to Amos Kloner, the Jerusalem District archeologist, the Talpiot cave was a typical middle- to upper-class Jewish family's tomb from the Second Temple period, which lasted from about 538 B.C. to A.D. 70.

Kloner himself is Jewish and he's not out to defend the Christian faith per se. Right now, he's interested in standing up for good science, valid research and archeology done according to professional standards

==========

Kloner, who worked on the tomb back in 1980, was quoted in the Jerusalem Post this week saying the documentary's claims are "nonsense" and he's not the only one. Among the many objections, "Jesus" and "Mary" were common names, and if Jesus was poor and from Nazareth, then what was he doing in a wealthy family tomb in Jerusalem?

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-etoff015113375mar01,0,1160130.column?coll=ny-news-columnists

==========

You also have to ask yourself: Why would most of the holy family from Galilee be buried in a middle-class tomb several miles outside of Jerusalem in some sheep pasture? They were, in fact, poor and could not afford an ornamental tomb like this one. This family was from Nazareth, too, with connections in Bethlehem. Why wouldn't its members be buried in one of those places?

Mr. Witherington is professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky., and the author of "What Have They Done With Jesus?" 
http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110009735

====================
The simple fact of the matter is that the name of Mary Magdalene does not appear on any ossuary in this alleged Jesus family tomb. Instead, a Greek form of the name Mary (in the Greek alphabet, not Aramaic) shows up, a form affected by wealthy ladies in Jerusalem whose families could afford ossuary interment. The evidence of this name suggests that the tomb is in fact not the last resting place of Galilean peasants, but the mausoleum of an aristocratic family in Jerusalem with pretensions to Hellenistic culture.
http://www.nysun.com/article/49701?page_no=2

Assumption 3 - (:09) An one-of-a-kind ossuary has been found that must have held the bones of Jesus Christ.

They found an ossurary “Jesus, son of Joseph.”  

:09 - (Drama) Archeologist is amazed!  Then the guy says, “When it was found, the archeologists weren’t too excited about it…”

… the name, "Jesus son of Joseph," has appeared on at least three or four ossuaries. 
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0301/p13s02-lire.html?page=1

Stephen Pfann, president of Jerusalem's University of the Holy Land and an expert in Semitic languages, appears in The Lost Tomb of Jesus. 

"I don't think it says Yehoshua [Jesus]. It says Hanun or something," Pfann said, after viewing high-resolution images of the ossuary inscription in question. 
But Pfann and Kloner both said it is not surprising to find a tomb containing this combination of Jewish names, which are among the most common of that period. 
He said scholars have also found inscriptions reading "Jesus, son of Joseph" in other tombs. 
In addition, Pfann said, the ossuary ascribed to Jesus was very plain, compared to the others found in the cave (see a photo of Jesus' purported ossuary next to the one attributed to Mary Magdalene). 
"The idea that the originator of a religion like this would end up in such a plain ossuary is kind of telling as to whether this is really potentially the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth or not," he said. 
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-jesus-tomb_2.html
===============

They found “Jesus, son of Joseph.”  Wouldn’t the family have labeled it, “Jesus, son of God?”

For example, if Jesus's followers actually had enough money to buy a lavish mausoleum, why did they mark his tomb as "Jesus, son of Joseph"? After all, the earliest writings in the Christian Bible show they referred to him in Aramaic as "Lord," "Messiah," and "Son of God."

http://www.nysun.com/article/49701?page_no=2

… neither Jesus' followers nor his family would have thought of Jesus as the son of Joseph and used that inscription. 
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0301/p13s02-lire.html?page=1

Assumption 4 - (:10) There is a conspiracy to ignore the ossuaries.
The filmmaker examined the ossuarys ‘to find out why they have been ignored.”

again, … the name, "Jesus son of Joseph," has appeared on at least three or four ossuaries. 
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0301/p13s02-lire.html?page=1
CONSPIRACY ALERT?  If the people in museum was really hiding the truth…. why wouldn’t they have ‘lost’ the ossuary?

Drama - (:12) The FILMMAKER, Jacobovici, says “Amazing is not the word for it…” about the discovery as “Jesus, Son of Joseph.”  

Perhaps the word for it is… “normal…”  “Here’s another one…”
“Hi, I’m looking for the ossuary that read, “Jesus, son of Joseph.”
“Sure, I’ll help you.  Which one do you want…”

EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE 4 of THEM!  wow… how amazing…

John Dominic Crossan (DePaul University) - says his faith is not shaken if the bones proved to be Jesus.  “I leave what happens to bodies up to God.”

Assumption 5 (:13) - “It seems that Christians can accept the possibility that the remains of Jesus were transferred to a family tomb.”

Paul believed the physical resurrection to be CRUCIAL to the faith!
1 Corinthians 15:12 - 32 (NLT) 12But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead?  13For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either.  14And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless.  15And we apostles would all be lying about God—for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave. But that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead.  16And if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised.  17And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless and you are still guilty of your sins.  18In that case, all who have died believing in Christ are lost!  19And if our hope in Christ is only for this life, we are more to be pitied than anyone in the world. 20But in fact, Christ has been raised from the dead. He is the first of a great harvest of all who have died.  21So you see, just as death came into the world through a man, now the resurrection from the dead has begun through another man.  22Just as everyone dies because we all belong to Adam, everyone who belongs to Christ will be given new life.  23But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised as the first of the harvest; then all who belong to Christ will be raised when he comes back.  24After that the end will come, when he will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having destroyed every ruler and authority and power.  25For Christ must reign until he humbles all his enemies beneath his feet.  26And the last enemy to be destroyed is death.  27For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under his authority.” (Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.)  28Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God’s authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.  29If the dead will not be raised, what point is there in people being baptized for those who are dead? Why do it unless the dead will someday rise again? 30And why should we ourselves risk our lives hour by hour?  31For I swear, dear brothers and sisters, that I face death daily. This is as certain as my pride in what Christ Jesus our Lord has done in you.  32And what value was there in fighting wild beasts—those people of Ephesus—if there will be no resurrection from the dead? And if there is no resurrection, “Let’s feast and drink, for tomorrow we die!” 

Romans 14:9 (NLT) 9Christ died and rose again for this very purpose—to be Lord both of the living and of the dead. 

Peter believed the physical resurrection was CRUCIAL:

1 Peter 3:21 (NLT) 21And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you, not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience. It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

“In theory, the ascension could have been spiritual, leaving his body behind.”

Assumption 6 - “In fact, those who take the strictly historical approach to the gospels would expect to find Jesus’ remains in the family tomb.”

First of all….  the writers just said, “in theory….”  then, in the next sentence, it’s “fact?”  How did that happen?

Let’s look at the 4 main historical approaches:

Matthew’s Historical Approach

Matthew 28:5 - 6 (NLT) 5Then the angel spoke to the women. “Don’t be afraid!” he said. “I know you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified.  6He isn’t here! He is risen from the dead, just as he said would happen. Come, see where his body was lying. 

Matthew 28:8 - 10 (NLT) 8The women ran quickly from the tomb. They were very frightened but also filled with great joy, and they rushed to give the disciples the angel’s message.  9And as they went, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they ran to him, grasped his feet, and worshiped him.  10Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t be afraid! Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee, and they will see me there.”

Mark’s Historical Approach

Mark 16:9 - 14 (NLT) 9After Jesus rose from the dead early on Sunday morning, the first person who saw him was Mary Magdalene, the woman from whom he had cast out seven demons.  10She went to the disciples, who were grieving and weeping, and told them what had happened.  11But when she told them that Jesus was alive and she had seen him, they didn’t believe her. 12Afterward he appeared in a different form to two of his followers who were walking from Jerusalem into the country.  13They rushed back to tell the others, but no one believed them.  14Still later he appeared to the eleven disciples as they were eating together. He rebuked them for their stubborn unbelief because they refused to believe those who had seen him after he had been raised from the dead.

Mark 16:19 - 20 (NLT) 19When the Lord Jesus had finished talking with them, he was taken up into heaven and sat down in the place of honor at God’s right hand.  20And the disciples went everywhere and preached, and the Lord worked through them, confirming what they said by many miraculous signs. 

Luke’s Historical Approach

Luke 24:1 - 7 (NLT) 1But very early on Sunday morning the women went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.  2They found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance.  3So they went in, but they didn’t find the body of the Lord Jesus.  4As they stood there puzzled, two men suddenly appeared to them, clothed in dazzling robes. 5The women were terrified and bowed with their faces to the ground. Then the men asked, “Why are you looking among the dead for someone who is alive?  6He isn’t here! He is risen from the dead! Remember what he told you back in Galilee,  7that the Son of Man must be betrayed into the hands of sinful men and be crucified, and that he would rise again on the third day.” 

Luke 24:11 - 12 (NLT) 11But the story sounded like nonsense to the men, so they didn’t believe it.  12However, Peter jumped up and ran to the tomb to look. Stooping, he peered in and saw the empty linen wrappings; then he went home again, wondering what had happened. 

On the road to Emmaus….. on of the men was talking to Jesus….
Luke 24:22 - 23 (NLT) 22“Then some women from our group of his followers were at his tomb early this morning, and they came back with an amazing report.  23They said his body was missing, and they had seen angels who told them Jesus is alive!  

Luke 24:31 - 34 (NLT) 31Suddenly, their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. And at that moment he disappeared! 32They said to each other, “Didn’t our hearts burn within us as he talked with us on the road and explained the Scriptures to us?”  33And within the hour they were on their way back to Jerusalem. There they found the eleven disciples and the others who had gathered with them,  34who said, “The Lord has really risen! He appeared to Peter.” 

Luke 24:36 - 43 (NLT) 36And just as they were telling about it, Jesus himself was suddenly standing there among them. “Peace be with you,” he said.  37But the whole group was startled and frightened, thinking they were seeing a ghost! 38“Why are you frightened?” he asked. “Why are your hearts filled with doubt?  39Look at my hands. Look at my feet. You can see that it’s really me. Touch me and make sure that I am not a ghost, because ghosts don’t have bodies, as you see that I do.”  40As he spoke, he showed them his hands and his feet.  41Still they stood there in disbelief, filled with joy and wonder. Then he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?”  42They gave him a piece of broiled fish,  43and he ate it as they watched. 

Luke 24:50 - 53 (NLT) 50Then Jesus led them to Bethany, and lifting his hands to heaven, he blessed them.  51While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up to heaven.  52So they worshiped him and then returned to Jerusalem filled with great joy.  53And they spent all of their time in the Temple, praising God.

John’s Historical Approach

John 20:1 - 10 (NLT) 1Early on Sunday morning, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance.  2She ran and found Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved. She said, “They have taken the Lord’s body out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” 3Peter and the other disciple started out for the tomb.  4They were both running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first.  5He stooped and looked in and saw the linen wrappings lying there, but he didn’t go in.  6Then Simon Peter arrived and went inside. He also noticed the linen wrappings lying there,  7while the cloth that had covered Jesus’ head was folded up and lying apart from the other wrappings.  8Then the disciple who had reached the tomb first also went in, and he saw and believed— 9for until then they still hadn’t understood the Scriptures that said Jesus must rise from the dead.  10Then they went home. 

John 20:11 - 16 (NLT) 11Mary was standing outside the tomb crying, and as she wept, she stooped and looked in.  12She saw two white-robed angels, one sitting at the head and the other at the foot of the place where the body of Jesus had been lying.  13“Dear woman, why are you crying?” the angels asked her. “Because they have taken away my Lord,” she replied, “and I don’t know where they have put him.”  14She turned to leave and saw someone standing there. It was Jesus, but she didn’t recognize him.  15“Dear woman, why are you crying?” Jesus asked her. “Who are you looking for?” She thought he was the gardener. “Sir,” she said, “if you have taken him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will go and get him.”  16“Mary!” Jesus said.  She turned to him and cried out, “Rabboni!” (which is Hebrew for “Teacher”). 

John 20:19 - 20 (NLT) 19That Sunday evening the disciples were meeting behind locked doors because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders. Suddenly, Jesus was standing there among them! “Peace be with you,” he said.  20As he spoke, he showed them the wounds in his hands and his side. They were filled with joy when they saw the Lord! 

John 20:24 - 29 (NLT) 24One of the disciples, Thomas (nicknamed the Twin), was not with the others when Jesus came.  25They told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side.”  26Eight days later the disciples were together again, and this time Thomas was with them. The doors were locked; but suddenly, as before, Jesus was standing among them. “Peace be with you,” he said.  27Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and look at my hands. Put your hand into the wound in my side. Don’t be faithless any longer. Believe!” 28“My Lord and my God!” Thomas exclaimed.  29Then Jesus told him, “You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing me.”

John 21:1 (NLT) 1Later, Jesus appeared again to the disciples beside the Sea of Galilee. This is how it happened. 

John 21:7 - 9 (NLT) 7Then the disciple Jesus loved said to Peter, “It’s the Lord!” When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his tunic (for he had stripped for work), jumped into the water, and headed to shore.  8The others stayed with the boat and pulled the loaded net to the shore, for they were only about a hundred yards from shore.  9When they got there, they found breakfast waiting for them—fish cooking over a charcoal fire, and some bread. 

John 21:24 - 25 (NLT) 24This disciple is the one who testifies to these events and has recorded them here. And we know that his account of these things is accurate.  25Jesus also did many other things. If they were all written down, I suppose the whole world could not contain the books that would be written. 

Acts 1:3 - 4 (NLT) 3During the forty days after his crucifixion, he appeared to the apostles from time to time, and he proved to them in many ways that he was actually alive. And he talked to them about the Kingdom of God. 4Once when he was eating with them, he commanded them, “Do not leave Jerusalem until the Father sends you the gift he promised, as I told you before. 

Acts 1:9 - 11 (NLT) 9After saying this, he was taken up into a cloud while they were watching, and they could no longer see him.  10As they strained to see him rising into heaven, two white-robed men suddenly stood among them.  11“Men of Galilee,” they said, “why are you standing here staring into heaven? Jesus has been taken from you into heaven, but someday he will return from heaven in the same way you saw him go!” 

All 4 Gospel writers wrote us the history of what happened.  All 4 clearly speak of a physical resurrection.  Mark & Luke (in Luke and Acts) tell the history of the Ascension as well!

To say that that it’s a fact that “… those who take the strictly historical approach to the gospels would expect to find Jesus’ remains in the family tomb” is an outright lie!  Those who took the REAL historical approach (the Disciples) would have been beyond surprised to get an invitation to Jesus’ burial ceremony!

Assumption 7 (:13) - The Christian Faith is based on ‘magic’ and is neither historical nor realistic.

“When he’s first buried, its in a temporary tomb.  And later, unless he somehow magically disappears and goes to heaven, which is the position of Christian faith… but if you are going to be historical & realistic, he would be put in a permanent place… a permanent place as a good jew… You have to have a family tomb.”

- Prof. James Tabor (University of North Carolina at Charlotte)

There are MANY educated people who hold to the Christian Faith.

Why exactly do you have to have a family tomb?

Assumption 8 (:20) - “After Jesus’ death, Mary continued with his teachings and must have gathered a large following.”

How exactly do you now that?

Is there any evidence of anything?

The last biblical reference to the Virgin Mary is Acts 1:14.

Acts 1:14 - 15 (NLT) 14They all met together and were constantly united in prayer, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, several other women, and the brothers of Jesus.  15During this time, when about 120 believers£ were together in one place, Peter stood up and addressed them. 

How do we know that she didn’t die after this?

She was probably 46 years old.

Critics (:31)   far fetched suggestion

Assumption 9 (:33) The relationship of the ossuaries validates the tomb.

Do we know the ossuaries relationship to each other.

The narrator speaks of the odds of calling for a “Jesus, with a father called Joseph & and mother named Mary & a brother named Yose, the odds that such an individual would resond are quite low…

Could it be that Yose is the father?  And Jesus is the brother of Mary?

The DNA only shows that Jesus & the ‘supposed ‘Mary Magdelene’ are not blood relatives….

the documentary team, who present all the names (except for the other Mary, whom they identify as the mother of Jesus, and “Judas, the son of Jesus”) as belonging to a single generation. In fact, the IAA archaeological report notes that at least 35 bodies had been interred in this grave, indicating that it was at best a multigenerational family tomb.

- Peter Nathan
http://vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=2392

Assumption 10 (:45) - The archeologists are conspiring to never attach an ossuary to the family of Jesus.

 “Experts” are unwilling to attach any ossuaries to the family of Jesus.

David Mevorah (Curator, Israel Museum) - said you never know 100% that an ossuary belonged to Caiaphas or any other person.  “We never know for 100% in archeology”.

Narrator: “But the experts do seem 100% comfortable connecting some ossuaries to famous names in the gospels - as long as they steer clear of any archeology connected to the Jesus family.”

That is total opinion.  How can you say  that?

Yep, it’s all just a big conspiracy…

Assumption 11 (:50) - The second Mary is Mary Magdalene’s.

“Would it make sense to find in the Jesus family tomb, 2 ossuaries with the name Mary?”

“It might make sense if this second Mary, this Mariamne, is Mary Magdalene.”

Later, this hypothesis is considered fact.

Assumption 12 (:51) - Christian Tradition suggests Mary Magdalene and her brother Philip were preachers to the Greek speaking Jews.

What Christian Tradition?
Did she preach?
Was her brother names Philip?

If Jesus did not rise physically from the dead, why would she preach?  It doesn’t make sense.

Assumption 13 (:51) - It’s quite likely that Mary Magdalene’s family & her followers may have written her name in Greek.

Sure.  And they could have also written it in Aramaic.
The only reason that this statement is made - is that it helps to justify the next statement, that the ossuary is written in Greek.  Kind of like setting up a spike in volleyball.

EVERYONE spoke Greek.  It was after the Hellenistic Period.  Thanks to Alexander the Great, EVERYONE spoke Greek.  And the ENTIRE New Testament was written in Greek.  It’s not a surprise that Mary Magdalene spoke Greek.  It would actually be a surprise if she could not.
BIG DEAL.  All of them spoke Greek.

Assumption 14 (:51) - Since the “Mariamene” ossuary is written in Greek, this proves that this was Mary Magdalene’s.

Very weak.  Again, EVERYONE spoke Greek.  This though only works if Mary Magdalene was unique in her ability to speak Greek.  This was simply not the case at all, thanks to Alexander the Great.

Narrator: If the  “Mariamene” inscription could be connected to Mary Magdalene, it would be more than interesting.

“By the end, his model concludes that there is only 1 chance in 600 that the Talpiot tomb is not the Jesus family tomb IF “Mariamene” can be linked to Mary Magdalene.”

Prof. Andrey Feuerverger, statistician used by the filmmakers:
I must work from the interpretations given to me, and the strength of the calculations are based on those assumptions… If for some reason one were to read it [the name “Mariamene”] as just a regular form of the name Maria, in that case, the calculation produced is not as impressive, and the statistical significance would wash out considerably. 
(Source: Discovery Channel debate with Ted Koppel which followed the documentary on Sunday night. For more on the name “Mariamene” see Dr. Bauckum’s article here.) 

When I first looked at this issue I was rather persuaded that the form Mariamne was a contracted form of Mariamene (which I think is what the Discovery Channel film claims), but I then found that the second and third century evidence (reviewed above) makes it much more plausible that the form Mariamne is a late deformation of Mariamme that occurred only in a context outside Palestine where the name was not known. So the Discovery Channel film’s claim that the name on the ossuary is the same as the name known to have been used for Mary Magdalene in the Acts of Philip is mistaken.

-- Prof. Richard Bauckham
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007/03/smoking-gun-tenth-talpiot-ossuary_9874.html

=============

Assumption 15 - Mary Magdalene is the same as the 2 unnamed women 
in John (caught in adultery) and Luke (woman who anoints Jesus’ feet and dries them with her).

Assumption 16 (:55) - Mary Magdalene is highly respected as a missionary in early Christian writing.

Which ones?  None that are in the Bible.

Assumption 17 (:55) - Church Fathers are part of the conspiracy!

Church Father began suppressing dozens of early Christian writings.  Primarily, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene & the Acts of Philip

DRAMA (:55) - Video showing the burning of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene & the Acts of Philip!

Assumption 18 (:55) - The Gospel of Mary & the Acts of Philip can be trusted.

The Gospel of Mary
The gospel of Mary Magdalene would better be titled “the gospel of Mary,” due to the fact that the Mary the gospel mentions is nowhere specified as Mary Magdalene. In the New Testament, there are six women named Mary, with three of them being prominent in the life of Jesus: Mary, Jesus’ mother; Mary Magdalene; and Mary of Bethany. It is only tradition that the Mary the gospel of Mary refers to is Mary Magdalene. 
 
            As a result of this conflict, conspiracy theorists contrive a conflict between patriarchal Christianity (exemplified by Peter) and true Christianity (exemplified by Mary). The Da Vinci Code takes this conspiracy theory to new ends by portraying the Christian church as covering up Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene, and denying His appointment of Mary as the leader of the church. The problem with this conspiracy theory is that there is absolutely no evidence for it, not even in the gospel of Mary. The gospel of Mary nowhere states that Jesus appointed Mary as the leader of the Christian church. The gospel of Mary nowhere states that Jesus and Mary were romantically involved.
 
            The gospel of Mary was not written by Mary Magdalene or any other the other Biblical Marys. The Gnostic teachings found in the gospel of Mary date it to the late 2nd century A.D. at the earliest. As a result, there is no validity to its teachings. Similar to the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Philip, and the gospel of Judas – the gospel of Mary is a Gnostic forgery, using the name of a Biblical character in an attempt to give validity to heretical teachings. 

http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Mary-Magdalene.html

Mary in the Gospel of Philip - 4th Century (According to Narrator)

The gospel of Philip does not claim to have been written by Jesus’ disciple Philip. It is titled “the gospel according to Philip” due to Philip being the only disciple of Jesus who is named in the gospel (73:8).

The gospel of Philip is a Gnostic gospel, presenting a Gnostic viewpoint of Jesus and His teachings. While there are a few verses in the gospel of Philip that resemble the four Biblical Gospels, a reading of the gospel of Philip will discover many irreconcilable differences and a completely different message of who Jesus was and what He came to do.

Whatever the case, even if the gospel of Philip explicitly stated that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, that would not make the idea true. The gospel of Philip was not written by the Apostle Philip or anyone who had ever met Jesus. The original writing of the gospel of Philip is dated to the 3rd century A.D. at the earliest…at least 200 years after Jesus’ death. The only value in studying the gospel of Philip is in learning what heresies existed in the early centuries of the Christian church.

http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Philip.html

Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Thomas
The Gospel of Thomas is not mentioned by the characters in The Da Vinci Code, which is understandable. Although it is one of the earliest Gnostic gospels - perhaps written around the time of the canonical gospels - its message is not as supportive of the novel's theories of Jesus as "the original feminist" and the importance of balance between male and female in the universe. 
Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." 

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the domain of Heaven." (114:1-3) 
Although this passage is unsuited to Brown's purposes, it is interesting that the Peter-Mary conflict appears again in this gospel, one of the earliest.
http://www.religionfacts.com/da_vinci_code/mary_magdalene_in_gospels.htm

Assumption 19 (:55) - Many believe that Mary Magdalene ended up in France.

There is no biblical record of this at all.

Assumption 20 (1:03) - Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ most trusted apostle.

According to the Acts of Philip.  Too bad that was written in the 4th century, well after Philip was dead.

Lie (1:03) - “The connection to the gospels (is) too strong to dismiss…”

The only problem…. the hypothesis ONLY connects to non-canonical gospels!

Stephen Pfann (1:15)

Assumption 21: DNA shows that since Jesus & Mariamene weren’t related, this proves that they were husband & wife.

Partial DNA Test… (1:17)

mitochondrial DNA - proves that Jesus & “Mariamene” did not have the same mother.

they could have been step brother & sister or cousins…

She could have been the wife of Matthew or Jose

This Jesus could have been married to the other Mary, and “Mariamene” could have been their daughter…

They would only ‘most likely be husband and wife” if they were the only 2 people in the tomb!  The problem is, there were 10 ossuaries.

====================
There is a huge leap of logic in moving from the purported DNA evidence that "Jesus" and "Mary" were not maternally related, to the conclusion that they were a couple. A whole range of other familial relationships are possible, even apart from the issue of whether this is in fact the Jesus, and the Mary Magdalene.
· Dr Justin Thacker is head of theology of the Evangelical Alliance 
j.thacker@eauk.org
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2023690,00.html

=======================
Dr. Darrell Bock, Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary:
There is the DNA showing that Mariamne and Jesus DNA residue do not match. Now with how many women in Judea would Jesus’ DNA not match? Even women named Mary/Mariamne? This proves nothing. … In fact, the fact that only two boxes were tested means that we do not even know if this is a family tomb, since the two tested show no relationship. The DNA could prove the exact opposite of what is being claimed. (Online Source)
http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/03/05/asking-the-experts-about-jesus%E2%80%99-lost-tomb/

==========
Dr. James White, Christian apologist, Director of Alpha and Omega Ministries:
One of the main “tests” I had in mind for this book [The Jesus Family Tomb] when I picked it up was this: Will the book honestly discuss the limitations of mitochondrial DNA? Will they admit that such analysis can only speak to maternal relations, not to paternal relations? Will they tell us what Dr. Carney Matheson has confirmed that such a test cannot rule out that Yeshua ben Yosef was the father of Mariamne? Or will they spin the results? The answer was: spin, spin, spin.
http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/03/05/asking-the-experts-about-jesus%E2%80%99-lost-tomb/

=========

Dr. Carney Matheson (from the Documentary) of Lakehead Univiersity Paleo-DNA Laboratory of Thunder Bay, Canada released this statement after the documentary…
“There is a statement in the film that has been taken out of context.  While marriage is possibility, other relationships like father and daughter, paternal cousins, sister-in-law or indeed two unrelated individuals (are also possible).  My conclusion is that they are not maternally related.  You cannot genetically test for marriage.”

After hearing the above quote, James D. Tabor (professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte) said…
that the mother of Judah could have just as easily been the other Mary or one of the 4 unnamed ossuaries.

the above is from the “The Lost Tomb of Jesus: A Critical Look” that aired on the Discovery Channel on May 4, 2007

======================

… human remains of four or five generations could have been stored in a single ossuary, which means that there can be no control over the DNA found in any of the boxes. In other words, the DNA results prove nothing. Following standard practice, the excavation team removed the bones from the ossuaries in 1980 and handed them over to the religious authorities for reburial. No record appears to have been kept of the exact contents of the bone boxes or of how many skeletons were contained in each. So while some DNA may be recovered from residues in the boxes, we have no way of knowing to whom it belonged. The initial archaeological report also indicates that the tomb had been disturbed in the distant past and that parts of skeletons were scattered in the cave. We don’t know whether these were placed in the ossuaries to facilitate their removal from the tomb. Clearly, then, any DNA results are at best dubious.

 - Peter Nathan
http://vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=2392

Assumption 22: The finding of the James’ ossuary proves that this was Jesus’ family tomb.

Nope.  Maybe it was the tomb, but it doesn’t prove anything else.

======================

The “Documentary” stated that the patina samples from the James ossuary matches the other ossuaries from the “Jesus Tomb”

Robert Genna, the Director of the Suffolk Co. Crime Laboratory, has since released this statement:

“The elemental composition of some of the samples we tested from the ossuaries are consistent with each other. But I would never say they’re a match… No scientist would ever say definitively that one ossuary came from the same tomb as another… We didn’t do enough sampling to see if in fact there were other tombs that had similar elemental compositions… The only samples we can positively say are a ‘match’ from a single source are fingerprints and DNA.”

the above is from the “The Lost Tomb of Jesus: A Critical Look” that aired on the Discovery Channel on May 4, 2007

======================

Prof. Amos Kloner, Israeli archeologist who first catalogued the ossuaries:
[When asked: What of the assertion that the 10th ossuary disappeared from your care and may be none other than the “James” ossuary?, Kloner responded:] Nothing has disappeared. The 10th ossuary was on my list. The measurements were not the same (as the James ossuary). It was plain (without an inscription). We had no room under our roofs for all the ossuaries, so unmarked ones were sometimes kept in the courtyard (of the Rockefeller Museum).  (Online Source)
Dr. Joe Zias, Paleopathologist at Hebrew University, archeologist who worked with Amos Kloner on the original find:
Amos Kloner is right as I received and catalogued the objects, the 10th was plain and I put it out in the courtyard with all the rest of the plain ossuaries as was the standard procedure when one has little storage space available. Nothing was stolen nor missing and they [the filmmakers] were fully aware of this fact, just didn’t fit in with their agenda.

http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/03/05/asking-the-experts-about-jesus%E2%80%99-lost-tomb/

==========================

Assumption 23: The James ossuary is most likely authentic

Most troublesome, though, is Jacobovici's assertions about the reputed ossuary holding the remains of James, another reputed brother of Jesus. "Tomb" argues that James was also buried in the family tomb, except that his ossuary was missing from the tomb back in 1980. Through forensic analysis, "Tomb" argues that a "James ossuary" owned by an Israeli antiques dealer named Oded Golan was originally there. If so, then the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of this being the family tomb - or so says "Tomb."

Unfortunately for "Lost Tomb of Jesus," Golan was arrested four years ago and he's currently on trial in Israel for forging the name "James" on the ossuary. A red flag? Not to Jacobovici or his willfully gullible supporters.

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-etoff015113375mar01,0,1160130.column?coll=ny-news-columnists

=========

About Oded Golan

Alleged forger of Holy Land antiquities held 

Antiquities dealer Oded Golan has been arrested on suspicion of forging artifacts linked to Jesus and the Jerusalem Temple. He is being investigated for fraud, forgery, using forged documents, and perverting the course of justice.

Golan was arrested Monday at his Tel Aviv home during a probe into his dealing in fake antiquities. These included the Jehoash inscription, a shoebox-sized tablet inscribed with Biblical-style Hebrew instructions on caring for the Jewish Temple, and an ossuary, or ancient burial box bearing the inscription, "James, brother of Jesus."

The "finds" - especially the ossuary with its supposed first ever direct archaeological link to Jesus of Nazareth - stirred a global sensation before scholars proved them fake.

Jerusalem Magistrate's Court yesterday agreed to remand Golan in custody until Friday to give police time to complete their inquiries and question other witnesses.

Golan was arrested after the Jerusalem fraud squad made extensive searches of his home and storerooms. During the searches, Golan led investigators to a room he had built on the roof of his Tel Aviv home where they found equipment and materials Golan is believed to have used to "forge" antiquities. A number of other "antiques" in various stages of production were uncovered.

During yesterday's court hearing, detectives expressed their "surprise" that the James ossuary, briefly insured for more than $1 million, was being stored on Golan's roof without any security or protection from the elements.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=320971&sw=Oded

More fakes suspected
When the police took Oded Golan into custody and searched his apartment they discovered a workshop with a range of tools, materials, and half finished 'antiquities'. This was evidence for an operation of a scale far greater than they had suspected. 
Investigators have established that collectors around the world have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for artefacts that came through Oded Golan's associates. Dozens of these items have now been examined by Dr Goren, and all have been revealed to be forgeries. Police now suspect that artefacts made by the same team of forgers have found their way into leading museums around the world.
Some archaeologists have now concluded that everything that came to market in the last 20 years without clear provenance should be considered a fake. Many of these objects, like the stone tablet which started the investigation, were cynically playing on the desire of many of the collectors to see the bible confirmed as history. For those in search of the temple of Solomon - their goal is as far away as ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/solomon_prog_summary.shtml

http://www.laputanlogic.com/articles/2003/06/15-95893582.html

Assumption 24: (1:49) - Jesus had something to hide.

Since Jesus spoke in parables, he must have been harboring great secrets.

Sure.  Sounds convenient.  Here comes the setup for the next spike of the proverbial volleyball…

Assumption 25 (1:54) - Jesus Christ would named his son “Judas” or “Judah”

I’m not sure why, considering Judas was the name of his betrayer.

Dr. Andreas Kostenberger, Professor of New Testament and Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary:
The claim that Mary Magdalene’s bones were found in one of the ossuaries on the basis that the name “Mariamne” (Mary) is inscribed on it is bogus; the connection drawn here is pulled completely out of thin air. [Moreover,] If you had been Jesus and (for argument’s sake) had had a son, would you have named him Judas (same as Judah or Jude), like the man who betrayed you?  (Online Source)
http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/03/05/asking-the-experts-about-jesus%E2%80%99-lost-tomb/

Assumption 26 (1:54) - The audience believes the previous 20 assumptions are correct.

BIG Assumption.

Assumption 27 (1:54) Archaeology is more trustworthy than the New Testament.

The finding of the “Judah son of Jesus” ossuary proves the New Testament wrong.

They’ve already discounted the New Testament, why change now?

Assumption 28 (1:54) “Judah, Son of Jesus” was also the son of “Mariamne.”

There’s absolutely no proof.  They should have tested this DNA before they drew this conclusion.  The ossuary only says “son of Jesus.”

Assumption 29 (1:55) - The unnamed disciple in the gospel of John is actually Jesus’ son, Judah.

Judah was not named in order to protect him.  

Then, why name him at all?

No one believes that.  The unnamed disciple is clearly John!  He is not naming himself!

Assumption 30 (1:56) - “Woman behold your son” in John refers to Judah, the son of Jesus.

John 19:25 - 27 (NLT) 25Standing near the cross were Jesus’ mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary (the wife of Clopas), and Mary Magdalene.  26When Jesus saw his mother standing there beside the disciple he loved, he said to her, “Dear woman, here is your son.”  27And he said to this disciple, “Here is your mother.” And from then on this disciple took her into his home. 

If the conspiracy was to conceal Judah’s indentity, why would Jesus reveal it to everyone at the cross, including the Roman soldiers?

And Jesus was CLEARLY talking to his Mom!

Assumption 31 (1:56) - Theology has changed…

Jesus really was talking to Mary Magdalene.  We just changed the theology.

EVERY translation cleary says that he was talking to his mother!  There is NO room to say otherwise.

YLT: 26Jesus, therefore, having seen his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he was loving, he saith to his mother, ‘Woman, lo, thy son;’ 
 
TMSG: 26Jesus saw his mother and the disciple he loved standing near her. He said to his mother, “Woman, here is your son.” 
 
NKJV: 26When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” 
 
NIV: 26When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” 
 
KJV: 26When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 
 
NASB: 26When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said* to His mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 
 
NLT: 26When Jesus saw his mother standing there beside the disciple he loved, he said to her, “Dear woman, here is your son.” 
 
TEV: 26Jesus saw his mother and the disciple he loved standing there; so he said to his mother, “He is your son.”

Assumption 32 (1:59) - The Israeli Antiquities Association (IAA) is conspiring to keep the filmmakers out of the tomb to keep secrets hidden.

The filmmakers illegally broke into the tomb.  And what secrets could be contained in there?  They were inside.  They filmed inside.  It was empty.

Assumption 33 - No one doubts the transcription on the ossuary of Mariamene.
The scholars who analyzed the Greek inscription on one of the ossuaries after its discovery read it as "Mariamene e Mara," meaning "Mary the teacher" or "Mary the master."
Before the movie was screened, Jacobovici said that particular inscription provided crucial support for his claim. The name Mariamene is rare, and in some early Christian texts it is believed to refer to Mary Magdalene.
But having analyzed the inscription, Pfann published a detailed article on his university's Web site asserting that it doesn't read "Mariamene" at all.
• Click here to read Pfann's argument that the name is really two separate names.
The inscription, Pfann said, is made up of two names inscribed by two different hands: the first, "Mariame," was inscribed in a formal Greek script, and later, when the bones of another woman were added to the box, another scribe using a different cursive script added the words "kai Mara," meaning "and Mara."
Mara is a different form of the name Martha.
According to Pfann's reading, the ossuary did not house the bones of "Mary the teacher," but rather of two women, "Mary and Martha."
"In view of the above, there is no longer any reason to be tempted to link this ossuary ... to Mary Magdalene or any other person in biblical, non-biblical or church tradition," Pfann wrote.
In the interest of telling a good story, Pfann said, the documentary engaged in some "fudging" of the facts.
"James Cameron is a great guru of science fiction, and he's taking it to a new level with Simcha Jacobovici. You take a little bit of science, spin a good yarn out of it and you get another 'Terminator' or 'Life of Brian,'" said Pfann, who briefly appeared as an ossuary expert in the documentary.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258716,00.html

=========================

Summary

Mr. Cameron's claims in his preface to Simcha Jacobovici's book, "The Jesus Family Tomb," that we have had no hard evidence for Jesus' existence before now except in the Bible. That ignores mentions in ancient Roman and Jewish historians such Tacitus, Suetonius and Josephus.
Mr. Witherington is professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky., and the author of "What Have They Done With Jesus?" 
http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110009735

It has been presented as a fact!

Should have been a show of “what ifs…”

There are too many things, historically & culturally that have to happen in order for this to work.  The IF’s that lead into the THEN’s are big IF’s.  And they ALL have to be there in order for this to work.  And at virtually every IF I can say that that’s a big IF.  I’m not sure that actually is what is likely to have taken place knowing what we already know historically about the nature of the first century.
- Dr. Darrell L. Bock is Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary

Somebody takes -- starts off with a predicate this could be true. And then they tie it to something else, which could be true. By the time you're finished with this game, you have nothing but a mountain of speculation. And the idea that is preposterous that somehow you are going to come up with some statistical measure.
- William Donohue, President, Catholic League
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/26/lkl.01.html

No coincidence that the filmmaker opened the tomb in 2005 - finished this a while ago, and waited to show it right before Easter…. WHEN his book is released for purchase!

+++++++++++++++++

Of course, the main implicit contention of the documentary and book is that the Resurrection is demonstrably a fraud--and thus, we must assume, people like Peter and James, the brother of Jesus, were prepared to be martyred in grisly ways to perpetrate a fraud.
Mr. Witherington is professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky., and the author of "What Have They Done With Jesus?" 
http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110009735

=================

The Disciples died a grisly death.  They would not have done this for a lie.

============

All leading Israeli archaeologists denounce attempts to link this tomb with Christ’s family, and use of dubious evidence to contradict the resurrection story in the New Testament. Israel’s former UN Ambassador Dore Gold makes clear in his new book “The Fight for Jerusalem,” that media outlets love focusing on challenges to Biblical accounts, but largely ignore mounting scientific evidence confirming scriptural stories. “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” follows this pattern as an insult both to responsible history and religious belief.

http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/54acacca-617b-4727-949c-24f5d7f65caa

========================

"And Jacobovici’s evidence that one of his dubious claims is actually fact? 'People can Google this' I rest my case."

===================

Hollywood, no longer satisfied with trying to undermine Christianity, was taking a shovel, pickax and video camera and trying to physically destroy it. The man who showed us Kate Winslet's breasts in Titanic was boasting that he had brought God to Manhattan in a box and DNA-tested him like a dinosaur femur.

Should have been titled “The Lost Tomb of Jesus or Some Guy with the Same Name”

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1595242,00.html

====================================================================

MARY MAGDALENE IS NOW MISSING:
A CORRECTED READING OF RAHMANI OSSUARY 701
By Stephen J. Pfann, Ph.D.
SUMMARY POINTS OF DISCUSSION:
*The original transcription of the inscription was incorrect.
*The inscription does not read “Mariamene the Master”nor does the name Mariamene or Mariamne appear on the ossuary at all.
*The inscription reflects the writing of two distinct scribes who wrote in different forms of the Greek script.
*The correct reading of the inscription is “Mariame and Mara,” based on parallels from contemporary inscriptions and documents.
*The ossuary thus contained the bones of at least two different women, interred at two separate times, one named Mariame and the other Mara.
*No support exists for ascribing the ossuary to Mary Magdalene.
Rahmani Ossuary 701
                  
“MARIAMENOU MARA”; Rahmani 701.

The name "Mariamene" is of central importance to the story line of the documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus and its companion book. Since “Mariamene” is unique (and likewise, “Mariamne,” is rare) among the ossuaries, this name is also highly significant when creating statistics and probabilities concerning the uniqueness of the Talpiot cave and its inscribed ossuaries. 
According to Prof. François Bovon of Harvard University Mary Magdalene's name in the apocryphal Acts of Philip was "Mariamne." Based upon apocryphal stories which speak of a close relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus, and which give a high prominence to her in the early church, the storywriters have surmised that Jesus and Mary were married and even produced a family. (Of these three assumptions—(1) that the name of Mary Magdalene was not Maria or Mariam, as recorded in the Gospels, but rather Mariamne; (2) that the Mariamne of the Acts of Philip is to be identified with Mary Magdalene, though the Acts of Philip never says so explicitly, and (3) that Jesus was married and fathered a child—none is supported by any of the earliest records dealing with these individuals, namely the canonical Gospels and Josephus).
The original publication of the ossuaries by archaeologists L.Y. Rahmani and A. Kloner interpreted this inscription as reading MARIAMENOU-MARA: "of Mariamene (a.k.a.) Mara." However, recent publications of Greek papyrus manuscripts among the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided evidence to clarify the reading of the ossuary. The following evidence challenges the existence of the name "Mariamene/Mariamne" in this tomb at all.
The first name and the first scribe:

The first name on the ossuary was written in the contemporary Greek documentary style of the first century. Four letters of the first name are clear and erect: M, A, R, I. The next three letters are written a bit more clumsily but are certainly recognizable, and in the same style: A, M, E. So far, the word as it stands forms 'MARIAME," which is the normal Greek form of the Hebrew name “Mariam.” (“Mariame” appears seven times in the Rahmani Ossuary Catalogue.) 
Of particular note, are the "M" mu, the “A” alpha and the “P” rho of the inscription. The lines on both parts of the inscription were inscribed, not deeply, with a dull pointed metal object. This instrument was most likely a metal stylus which was commonly used for taking notes on portable wax tablets and which makes similar marks. 
The "M" is formed by a number of separate but intersecting strokes. The separate strokes are indicated by the nonalignment, scissor-like appearance of the ends the various of the strokes where they intersect.
The "A" is formed by two strokes instead of three, comprising a right-tilted "V" followed by a left-tilted diagonal line. This reflects a semi-cursive tendency in this letter that appears in non-literary documents as well on ostraca and tituli picti in the first century CE at Masada and elsewhere. (Tituli picti are inscriptions on wine jars.)
The "P" (= R) is inscribed with two strokes. The vertical stroke descends well below the baseline. This feature is common among the ossuaries and is also typical of non-literary documents of the period as well as on the ostraca and tituli picti of Masada. 
This name is followed by a gap that is sufficiently wide to signify a space between distinct words.  
After this series of letters, the irregularities begin.  Rahmani suggested that the next letter was an “N.” However, it can only be read so if it is taken to be retrograde (i.e., written backwards.) The suggestion that it should be read as a retrograde “N” raises the question of whether it is truly an "N" at all. Among all of the ossuaries inscribed in Greek listed in Rahmani's Catalogue and the numerous ossuaries from Dominus Flevit (on the west slope of the Mt. of Olives), there are no other cases in which it has been suggested that an "N" has been written in this way. Furthermore, the following two letters do not resemble the combination “OU,” as proposed in Rahmani’s original publication. 

As we shall see, this is not because the scribe suddenly introduced anomalous letterforms, nor even changed his handwriting style in mid-sentence. Rather, it is because a second scribe had subsequently added the last two words of the inscription in a different handwriting style. Upon closer examination, it appears that the three letters Rahmani read as "NOU" are almost certainly to be translated by the common word “KAI” and, written in the Greek cursive form of the word.
Cursive tendencies and the second scribe:
Cursive tendencies among the various scribal hands led to varying degrees of cursive letter forms. These cursive forms often appeared in official documents which normally would be written in the formal Greek documentary script. These forms may be termed as cursive or semi-cursive depending upon the extent to which these tendencies were exhibited. The most common cursive tendency was to execute individual letterforms without lifting the tip of the pen from the writing surface. Another tendency was to connect consecutive letters without lifting the pen to form ligatures. This tendency is known as "connected writing" when the interconnection of letters is more prevalent. The overall appearance of cursive writing is that there is a graceful sequence of looping strokes as can be seen in KAI MARA. This stands in contrast to the triangular, squared and rather jagged succession strokes of the more formal script used by the first scribe while inscribing MARIAME.

As usual for both the semi-cursive and cursive "K," its left vertical stroke ascends above the rest of the letter (cf. 5/6Hev 12 and 5/6Hev16 below). A kappa that is written with only two separate strokes rather than three might be termed "semi-cursive" (as in the case of 5/6Hev12 below). The kappa on this ossuary exhibits the full cursive form of this letter, which requires that the letter's three strokes be executed without lifting the tip of the pen (cf. Masada tituli picti 858 and 5/6Hev16 below).  
 "KALON KERAMION" Masada tp 858
This is also true concerning the cursive form of the remaining letters A and I which, as in this case, were commonly written together as a ligature, i.e., without lifting the tip of the pen (cf. both 5/6Hev12 and 5/6Hev16 below). At times the entire word is written without lifting the pen as is clearest in XHever/Seiyal 63 and 69 and 5/6Hev16. (The cursive form of the “A” appears also in the second name "MARA").
Document exhibiting KAI with a semi-cursive kappa followed by the cursive ligature AI (5/6 Hev12):

Another document parroting the same text containing KAI but with cursive kappa, ligature AI and connected writing (5/6Hev16):

Following normal scribal practice of the period, the scribe engraved the words of his inscription in scripta continua: with no space between the words, writing KAIMARA. He, or someone else, subsequently provided a stroke, a word divider, to separate the KAI from the name, apparently to distinguish the two words, resulting in KAI'MARA. 
He also continued in the cursive style with respect to the word MARA.

The mu “M” of the second name Mara, is written in one continuous looping gesture. The first leg of the letter is initiated below the base line upon which the body of each letter sits, with the center of the letter sitting higher and formed like the letter "U", and the right leg curving toward the next letter. This is typical of Greek cursive and miniscule forms of the letter (e.g., see Masada tp858 and both 5/6Hev12 and 5/6Hev16 above). This stands in contrast to the practice illustrated in the first name of this inscription, where the entire letter “M” remains above the base line and the middle forms a pronounced "V"). 
The alpha "A," in both cases, appears to have been written with one continuous looping stroke. The first form exhibits a counterclockwise rotation with its final stroke finishing high near the letter's ceiling line. This is common among medial forms of the letter (i.e., a letter appearing before another letter in the same word) where the letter ends in a place near to where the initial stroke of next letter rho will begin (not dissimilar to the formation of the alpha of the ligature "AI" in the previous word KAI). The second example is a typical final form of the alpha (being the last letter of a word or line) where the final diagonal stroke of the enlarged letter descends and ends, almost emphatically, at its baseline.
The letter rho "R" (resembles a "P" but is pronounced like "R") is drawn with two strokes as is generally the case in most contemporary, locally inscribed papyrus documents, with the crescent shaped head written first, followed by the down stroke which descends well below the baseline.
In the photographs there appears to be a small line surviving between the last two letters of MARA. Upon close examination, it is clearly a small natural pit that must have preceded the inscription. This is similar to natural pitting found in various places elsewhere on the ossuary.
Yet another Mary and Martha?
This revised reading of the inscription based on contemporary inscriptions and documents would leave the words MARIAME KAI MARA "Mariam and Mara." Mara, as noted by Tal Ilan among other scholars, was a common shortened form of the Aramaic name “Martha.”
Due to the fact that (1) an ossuary would often contain more than one individual's bones and (2) these two names are among the most common personal names of the first century, the combination of these two names together on an ossuary is not unique.
In fact an ossuary was discovered at Dominus Flevit on the west slope of the Mt. of Olives that has the Hebrew equivalent of the two names as a pair written three times on the same ossuary (however, with the order reversed: "Martha and Maria"; Dominus Flevit, ossuary 7):

Multiple burial and DNA
The fact that two individuals were named on the side of an ossuary does not limit the remains inside to be of those two individuals. There may have been others inside whose names were not inscribed. To give us an idea as to how many idividuals might have been inside a single ossuary, there was one ossuary, also from the Dominus Flevit tomb complex (Dominus Flevit, Ossuary 37), which bears the names of five individuals, indicating that the ossuary contained at least five distinct burials. The named individuals buried in the ossuary were Zacharias, Mariame, El'azar, Simon, and Sheniit(?).The variety of scripts and character of the cuts indicate that the inscriptions were written by different individuals with distinct instruments. There may be the skeletal and DNA remains of at least five individuals in this box (not accounting for others who went unnamed).

CONCLUSION
The so-called "Mariamene" ossuary contained the names and remains of two distinct individuals. The first name on the ossuary, “MARIAME.” was written in the common Greek documentary script of the period on the occasion of the interment of the bones of this woman. The second and third words “KAI MARA” were added sometime later by a second scribe, when the bones of the second woman Mara were added to the ossuary. This scribe's handwriting includes numerous cursive elements not exhibited by the first scribe who wrote “Mariame.” In view of the above, there is no longer any reason to be tempted to link this ossuary (nor the ambiguous traces of DNA inside) to Mary Magdalene or any other person in Biblical, non-Biblical or church tradition.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bagatti, P.B. and Milik, J.T. Gli Scavi del “Dominus Flevit”, Parte 1. Jerusalem. Franciscan Printing Press. 1981.
Benoit, P., Milik, J.T., and de Vaux, R. Les Grottes de Murabba’at. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert II. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1961.
Cotton, H.M. and Geiger, J. Masada II: The Latin and Greek Documents. Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Society/The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 1989.
Cotton, H.M. and Yardmen, A. Aramaic Hebrew and Greek Documentary Texts from Nasal Hover and Other Sites. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XXVII. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1997.
Ilan, T. Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity: Part 1: Palestine 330 BCE-200 CE. Tübingen. Mohr Siebeck. 2002.
Lewis, N., Yadin, Y., and Greenfield, J.C. The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Caves of the Letters: Greek Papyri; Aramaic and Nabatean Signatures and Subscriptions. Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Society/The Hebrew University of Jerusalem/The Shrine of the Book. 1989.
Rahmani, L.Y. A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel. Jerusalem. The Israel Antiquities Authority/The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. 1994.

© 2007 University of the Holy Land
http://www.uhl.ac/MariameAndMartha/