Easily debunking Simcha Jacovovici and his associates

Even Australians don't believe in the dubious archeology proposed by Simcha Jacbobovici

The avalanche of rejection and repudiation on behalf of the academic community is weighing down on the proposed finding by Tabor and Jacobovici. 

Now in Australia, we are seeing this issue come to our shores, and there are no supporters of both Tabor and Jacobovici here either. The news piece in Christian Today Australia, shows how these two individuals are using the Bible and Archeology to further their cause, in getting more money that is.

I post the whole news item so you can see how dubious these people's claim is. They are trying to make money out of the Bible and faulty archeology.

The new tomb – about 200 feet from the "Jesus Family Tomb" – is marked with the first Christian symbol, the cross. It also has markings allegedly saying "Divine Jehovah, raise up, raise up" and a drawing of a fish with a stick. 

"In my assessment, there's zero percent chance that their theory is correct," Andrew Vaughn, executive director of the American Schools of Oriental Research, told MSNBC of the findings. For him, the second tomb does not strengthen the case that the first one is authentic. 

The original "Jesus Discovery," book is based on a 1980 finding of 10 small caskets – known as ossuaries – that allegedly contained the bones of Jesus Christ and his family. One of the casket's inscriptions reads "Judah, son of Jesus," which the book writers radically say indicate that Jesus started a family. 

The radical assertions of both findings contradict many things modern Christians believe: Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, leaving no trace of a tomb or bones behind, according to the Bible. In addition, no scripture ever mentioned Jesus marrying or having children in over 30 years on earth. 

Many experts agree with the Christian viewpoint that the controversial findings are false, not only for faith's sake, but to prevent archaeological and scientific misuse as well. 

"Nothing in the book 'revolutionizes our understanding of Jesus or early Christianity,' as the authors and publisher claim," Duke University biblical scholar Eric Meyers told MSNBC. "We may regard this book as yet another in a long list of presentations that misuse not only the Bible but also archaeology." 

"It pains me to see archaeology hijacked in the service of non-scientific interests," agreed Jodi Magness, a religious studies professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Some experts accuse Tabor and Jacobovici of fabricating the meanings of an otherwise unimportant historical find for publicity, fame, and book sales. Their book was released Tuesday. 

"It's an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave," Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site over 30 years ago, told MSNBC. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at that time." 

A 1996 documentary by the BBC on the same subject led Kloner to a similar conclusion: "They just want to get money for it." 

More doubt has been cast on the research, especially when the artifacts, markings, and inscriptions being discussed have never been viewed by the naked eye; Jacobovici used a robotic arm equipped with a camera to gain access to the tomb without disturbing it completely. 

"The current claim is based on finds that have no context, as they have not been excavated. All we have are photos taken by a robotic arm of objects (or parts of objects), the dates and identification of which are unknown or unclear," wrote Magness. 

Christopher Rollston, an expert in Semitic epigraphy at Emmanuel Christian Seminary in Tennessee, said he and others will remain unconvinced because of a lack of evidence.
"Dramatic claims require dramatic evidence," he wrote on the ASOR blog. "The claims of Tabor and Jacobovici for this tomb are no more convincing now than they were then."

The right words about Simcha Jacobovici

'Simcha Jacobovici, the documentary director and producer of the "Naked Archaeologist" can no doubt simultaneously be considered both the world's "best" amateur archaeologist (because he seems to find everything he looks for) and the world's "worst" amateur archaeologist (because he seems to find everything he looks for).' -  Fathers of the Holy Cross Monastery (California).

(Via Esteban Vazquez)

More scholars add their dissent from the latest "archeological finding" about Jesus and his disciples.

I just blogged about this, and now, I offer another voice of dissent from a real archeologist.
***************************************************************

COMMENTS FROM PROF. STEVEN FINE ON THE “JESUS DISCOVERY”

§ March 1st, 2012 § Filed under Archaeology, Archaeology and Bible, Archaeology in the News, ASOR, Epigraphy § Tagged Jerusalem,Jesus Tomb response, New Jesus Discovery response § 1 Comment

I was a member of a team assembled last summer by a major media outlet to evaluate this project. Sitting in a stately conference room, Mr. Jacobovici, Professor Tabor and Professor Charlesworth presented their discoveries for the consideration of an internationally renowned group of scholars. The members of the evaluating team then offered our professional evaluations of this project.

After a short introduction, my colleagues and I were shown the so-called “fish.” At that point, I opened my Ipad and pulled off the web an article of mine that deals with similar looking artifacts (http://cojs.org/stevenfine/articles_files/Feinberg-Fine.pdf). The article is itself a chapter of my book (Art and Judaism in the Greco-Roman World [Cambridge University Press, 2005, rev. 2011]). I proceeded to show team of scholars a whole group of Nefesh tombs from Jerusalem, and I pointed out parallels in modern Syria, Lebanon and Pompeii. I noted that this was a very common type of burial monument in the first century.

Most importantly, images of such funerary monuments were often inscribed on the sides of ossuaries—secondary burial boxes used in the environs of Jerusalem. They have been widely published and are very well known (see my article for bibliography and illustrations). This so-called Jonah “icon” (as it has been described in media materials), is nothing more than the image of an ancient Jewish tomb incised on the side of an ossuary. In fact, it is a very nice image of one.

The interpretation presented by Professor Tabor is not grounded in the evidence, nor in even the most basic rules of art-historical analysis. The image has nothing to do with Jonah, Jesus, or Judea in the first century. Elsewhere I have referred to this genre of media-driven discoveries as the “DaVinci Codification” of our culture—the presentation of odd and associative thinking previously reserved for novels as “truth” to the general public (http://sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=655). The “Jonah Fish” is just the next installment in the Jesus-archaeology franchise—timed, as always, to proceed a major Christian feast.

I, for one, am wearied by the almost yearly “teaching moment” presented by these types of “discoveries.” I am hopeful, however, that—this time—a forceful and quick display of unanimous dissent by the leading members of the academic community will be taken seriously by the media and the public at large.

Steven Fine, 
Professor of Jewish History, Yeshiva University
Director, YU Center for Israel Studies, www.yu.edu/cis
Co-editor, Images: A Journal of Jewish Art and Visual Culture
Website: http://yeshiva.academia.edu/StevenFine/About