Comments on: The Rise and Fall of the James Ossuary http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION. Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:03:33 +0000 By: lpetrich http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-29039 lpetrich Fri, 07 Dec 2007 12:15:10 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-29039 terrence, you ought to be more careful. Krishna's mother was Devaki, and she had 7 children, all boys, before she had Krishna. Who's Celestine? Dionysus's mother was Semele Hercules's mother was Alcmene Divine impregnation was almost absurdly common in Greek mythology, to the point that such well-documented people as Pythagoras, Plato, Alexander the Great, and Augustus Caesar got stories of literal biological divine paternity told about them. However, divine impregnation is lacking from some other mythologies, notably the Old Testament. Try studying Lord Raglan's Mythic-Hero profile some time -- Jesus Christ fits remarkably well. terrence, you ought to be more careful.

Krishna's mother was Devaki, and she had 7 children, all boys, before she had Krishna.
Who's Celestine?
Dionysus's mother was Semele
Hercules's mother was Alcmene

Divine impregnation was almost absurdly common in Greek mythology, to the point that such well-documented people as Pythagoras, Plato, Alexander the Great, and Augustus Caesar got stories of literal biological divine paternity told about them. However, divine impregnation is lacking from some other mythologies, notably the Old Testament.

Try studying Lord Raglan's Mythic-Hero profile some time -- Jesus Christ fits remarkably well.

]]> By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-29032 OMGF Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:28:42 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-29032 I got this article over on Pharyngula and thought it fit in well with this post. <a href="http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/fauxark/" rel="nofollow">This is an interesting read on the topic as well.</a> I got this article over on Pharyngula and thought it fit in well with this post.

This is an interesting read on the topic as well.

]]> By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28983 OMGF Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:37:16 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28983 At least there's still the Shroud of Turin! HA!!!!!11111oneoneonepwnpwnpwn .... Oh wait... At least there's still the Shroud of Turin! HA!!!!!11111oneoneonepwnpwnpwn

....

Oh wait...

]]> By: Entomologista http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28981 Entomologista Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:04:53 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28981 My Ethiopian Orthodox labmate says the Ark of the Covenant is located in Ethiopia. Specifically, in the town of Axum. My Ethiopian Orthodox labmate says the Ark of the Covenant is located in Ethiopia. Specifically, in the town of Axum.

]]> By: terrence http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28979 terrence Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:41:00 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28979 Over at www.russellsteapot.com, you can learn that Deviki, mother of Krishna; Celestine, mother of the crucified Zunis; Chimalman, mother of Quexalcote; Minerva, mother of Bacchus; and Prudence, mother of Hercules were all virgins. So for all of you who are constantly prattling on about relying on "evidence" -- I'd say that's pretty strong evidence that Mary was a virgin, too. :) Over at http://www.russellsteapot.com, you can learn that Deviki, mother of Krishna; Celestine, mother of the crucified Zunis; Chimalman, mother of Quexalcote; Minerva, mother of Bacchus; and Prudence, mother of Hercules were all virgins. So for all of you who are constantly prattling on about relying on "evidence" -- I'd say that's pretty strong evidence that Mary was a virgin, too. :)

]]> By: konrad_arflane http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28977 konrad_arflane Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:23:43 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28977 <blockquote>She had to have given birth to other children because the scripture refers to Jesus as her "first-born" son, implying that there were more.</blockquote> Maybe, maybe not. I'd say it depends on the context where "first-born" appears. It's in Luke ch. 2, of course, but does it appear elsewhere? If not, I think it is defensible to claim that "first-born" refers only to the fact that she had had no other children when she gave birth to Jesus - that is, it can be taken in the context of the of the knowledge available to the characters in the narrative, and not in the context of the knowledge available to the narrator. In any event, even if "first-born" appears elsewhere, it seems rather shaky ground for concluding that Jesus necessarily had siblings, in the absence of corroborating evidence.

She had to have given birth to other children because the scripture refers to Jesus as her "first-born" son, implying that there were more.

Maybe, maybe not. I'd say it depends on the context where "first-born" appears. It's in Luke ch. 2, of course, but does it appear elsewhere? If not, I think it is defensible to claim that "first-born" refers only to the fact that she had had no other children when she gave birth to Jesus - that is, it can be taken in the context of the of the knowledge available to the characters in the narrative, and not in the context of the knowledge available to the narrator.

In any event, even if "first-born" appears elsewhere, it seems rather shaky ground for concluding that Jesus necessarily had siblings, in the absence of corroborating evidence.

]]> By: corsair the rational pirate http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28976 corsair the rational pirate Tue, 04 Dec 2007 12:33:35 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28976 Thank you, DamienSansBlog for that education. I will try and work that into my conversations with people somehow. Thank you, DamienSansBlog for that education. I will try and work that into my conversations with people somehow.

]]> By: DamienSansBlog http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28971 DamienSansBlog Tue, 04 Dec 2007 02:21:25 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28971 "Biblical Archaelogy Review"...I'm curious, do other religions get their own archeological sub-fields? Qur'anic Archeology, Vedic Archaeology, etc.? I know that there is archaeology focusing, for example, on India's Vedic period, but does it get official recognition in capital letters? Also, Corsair, be advised that "hypocrisy" was originally a Greek word, meaning something like "to play a part as an actor on a stage". Not very useful information, I know, but maybe you'll find it edifiying, somewhere, somehow. "Biblical Archaelogy Review"...I'm curious, do other religions get their own archeological sub-fields? Qur'anic Archeology, Vedic Archaeology, etc.? I know that there is archaeology focusing, for example, on India's Vedic period, but does it get official recognition in capital letters?

Also, Corsair, be advised that "hypocrisy" was originally a Greek word, meaning something like "to play a part as an actor on a stage". Not very useful information, I know, but maybe you'll find it edifiying, somewhere, somehow.

]]> By: Heathen Dan http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28968 Heathen Dan Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:17:19 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28968 The basic story is already quite known, though I had hoped that you could say more about the "hold-outs" who still support the Ossuary. Shanks' journal, <a href="http://www.bib-arch.org/bswbOOossuary_01debate.asp" rel="nofollow">Biblical Archaeology Review</a>, still maintains that fraud is unproven and that a reexamination of the bone box is needed. The basic story is already quite known, though I had hoped that you could say more about the "hold-outs" who still support the Ossuary. Shanks' journal, Biblical Archaeology Review, still maintains that fraud is unproven and that a reexamination of the bone box is needed.

]]> By: Brock http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28966 Brock Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:08:45 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/12/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-james-ossuary.html#comment-28966 Greta-- I've heard two suggestions regarding James and the other siblings. One is that they were Joseph's children from a previous marriage (No Biblical indications of this, are there?) The other, and this is really beautiful, is that ALL THE OTHER SIBLINGS WERE VIRGIN BIRTHS TOO!!!!!!! She had to have given birth to other children because the scripture refers to Jesus as her "first-born" son, implying that there were more. This raises a problem however, that I'm not sure how to answer. In the first virgin birth, there was a father, sort of--The Holy Spook. In the followup virgin births, who, or what was the father? And if God really places such a premium on Mary's virginity, why did Jesus need brothers and sisters so much that a succession of miracles were provided for Mary to have them? Greta--
I've heard two suggestions regarding James and the other siblings. One is that they were Joseph's children from a previous marriage (No Biblical indications of this, are there?) The other, and this is really beautiful, is that ALL THE OTHER SIBLINGS WERE VIRGIN BIRTHS TOO!!!!!!! She had to have given birth to other children because the scripture refers to Jesus as her "first-born" son, implying that there were more. This raises a problem however, that I'm not sure how to answer. In the first virgin birth, there was a father, sort of--The Holy Spook. In the followup virgin births, who, or what was the father? And if God really places such a premium on Mary's virginity, why did Jesus need brothers and sisters so much that a succession of miracles were provided for Mary to have them?

]]>