Gospel of Jesus' Wife - Smithsonian documentary in French

Back in September 2012, Smithsonian Channel were planning to air a documentary on the Gospel of Jesus' Wife. Once it became clear that there were several in the academic community who were uncertain about the authenticity of the piece, Smithsonian postponed the documentary and to this day it has not been broadcast in the USA.

However, it seems that it was in fact broadcast in France under the title Révélations sur la femme de Jésus and the film has found its way onto Youtube here:



The film has French commentary rather than subtitles, so you will need competent French to be able to follow it.  I must admit to enjoying watching the documentary.  It is beautifully produced, it largely avoids sensationalism, and gives lots of screen time to the three key players in the story, Karen King, Roger Bagnall and AnneMarie Luijendijk.  Luijendijk is even flown to Cairo for the documentary and discusses the Gospel of Philip there.  She also visits Nag Hammadi and gives the story of the find (genie and all) over against a new dramatization of the find in a one-person version.

The only other academics who appear in the piece are Dom. Henry Wansbrough, in Ampleforth, Robin Griffith-Jones, Master of the Temple in London, and Alberto Camplani, who speaks to the issue of the authenticity of the fragment.

It looks like the documentary added in some footage after scholars began to question the authenticity of the piece, and Francis Watson's piece even gets a screenshot:

Francis Watson's essay appears on-screen in Révélations sur la femme de Jésus

This is around the 32 minute mark.  The only scholar brought on to discuss the authenticity of the piece is Camplani, and there are several shots of this article:

Alberto Camplani's article appears on-screen in Révélations sur la femme de Jésus

The documentary goes to King and Bagnall after the authenticity issues are raised, but the footage of them appears to be drawn from the same filming some time before September 2012.

It will be interesting to see if the documentary does eventually appear on screen elsewhere, and it will be interesting to see also if the articles about the fragment appear in the Harvard Theological Review this year.

Thanks to Andre Gagne for the link to the Youtube version of the film.

A Short Film on Luke's Genealogy

I have always been fascinated by the genealogies of Matthew and Luke (Matt. 1.1-17, Luke 3.23-28) and have even recorded podcasts on them (e.g. NT Pod 9). Yet they get so little exposure and discussion in popular circles. So it's a pleasure to see this quirky little film that illustrates Luke 3.23-28:

  

The work is by Aaron Soldner and it is hosted at Spark and Echo Arts.  Thanks to Nathan Sherrer for letting me know about it.  Nathan tells me that anyone who would like more information or would like to connect with Aaron can write to him (jonathon@sparkandecho.org)  or to executive director Jonathon Roberts (jonathon@sparkandecho.org).

My interview with Robert Orlando, director of A Polite Bribe

Last Thursday, we held a screening at Duke University of Robert Orlando's film about Paul, A Polite Bribe. I was privileged to get the chance to talk to Robert before the screening of the film, and the conversation was captured on video and is now available here:


APB Prescreening Interview Duke-720 from A Polite Bribe on Vimeo.

See this link for my posts on: A Polite Bribe.

Q or not Q? Is there any shift?

Michael Goulder

Chris Keith asked earlier today whether I was still in the minority about Q.  His post generated a decent comments thread as well as a monster comments thread on Facebook (which is so often now the more lively place for conversation on these things).  I don't doubt for a moment that the Farrer theory is still the minority position, but I have been glad to see a good number of people coming over to the side of the angels as time has gone on.

I certainly feel much less lonely than I did fifteen or twenty years or so ago when it was automatically assumed in the USA that anyone who denied the existence of Q must also, of necessity, deny the existence of Marcan Priority too.  Indeed, Q sceptics probably thought the earth was flat too, and that Elvis was still alive.  I well remember Stephen Patterson describing the view as even more obscure than Griesbach.

It was something of a shock to me to discover just how deeply embedded belief in Q seemed to be, especially after I was cocooned by my Oxford education, where, in the 1980s, everyone seemed to be sceptical about Q (E. P. Sanders, N. T. Wright, John Fenton, Eric Franklin and later, John Muddiman).

Michael Goulder (above) always used to feel that he was "contra mundum" on Q and he was delighted when Ed Sanders declared his (moderated) support for his theory in the book he co-authored with Margaret Davies in 1990.  I have been lucky to have found myself a little less isolated, but even if that were not so, I would not be ashamed to find myself in the same camp as two of the finest minds (I would say the two finest minds) in NT studies in recent decades.

But now, Anthony Le Donne wants to know just how popular the Q theory is these days -- and you can vote over on the blog he shares with Chris Keith -- Do You Q?  So who do you side with?

Memories are short in the blogosphere, but a handful of regular readers may remember that back in 2007 there was a similar poll run by Brandon Wason.  The poll itself has now gone, but my post on it survives.

Update: revised link.  Already interesting results. If you have not done so already, go and vote now!

The Apostle Paul: A Polite Bribe comes to Duke this week

I have talked on a couple of previous occasions about Robert Orlando's film about Paul (The Apostle Paul - A Polite Bribe in New York).  Here's the website:

A Polite Bribe

It includes trailers and lots more information about the film, including excerpts of the featured scholars, including local stars Douglas Campbell and Bart Ehrman.

This week the film comes to Duke.  On Thursday 23 January, at 7.30pm, please come along to the free screening at the Full Frame Theater on the Tobacco Campus (pictured below).

There are also two bonus events.  First, at 6pm, I will be interviewing the director Robert Orlando.  If you can make it for this event, please be there in good time because the event is being recorded and we will close the doors at six.  There will be a 30 minute break between the interview and the film's screening at 7.30.

After the screening, there will be a panel discussion featuring director Robert Orlando and participant Douglas Campbell.

This event is free and open to the public, but space is limited, so please get there early.  Don't worry if you can't make it for for the pre-film interview at 6pm; we are expecting the largest audience for the film screening itself.

Full Frame Theater, Tobacco Campus, Duke University

The timetable looks like this:

6pm: Mark Goodacre interviews Robert Orlando

7.30pm: The Apostle Paul: A Polite Bribe (free screening)

8.50pm: Panel discussion featuring Robert Orlando and Douglas Campbell

If you have any questions, please be in touch.  I look forward to seeing you there.

Beyond Belief: Archaeology and Religion

I have always enjoyed listening to Beyond Belief on Radio 4, especially since they started releasing it as a podcast.  Back in the day I used to guest on the programme myself, but these days one of the plusses is that I often know (or know of) other contributors to the programme.   This week's episode featured renowned Hebrew Bible scholar Francesca Stravrakopoulou in a thoroughly enjoyable discussion of "Religion and Archaeology".  Listen here:

Beyond Belief: Archaeology and Religion

Or do what I do and download the podcast version here:

Podcasts and Downloads: Beyond Belief

A couple of highlights: some discussion of a "Christian Zionist" viewpoint at the mid-point of the episode, and a reference towards the end to Dr Stavrakopoulou's hate mail.

Before posting this, I thought to myself, "I bet Jim West has already posted on this," so I took a look and I was not wrong!

Biblical Studies Online Website

Several have already publicized this great new resource from James Crossley and Deane Galbraith, both friends of the bibliobloggers:

Biblical Studies Online

It uses a blog format, with individual tagged posts, to create a nice series of topics that can expand as time goes on, covering a good, full range of topics of interest to scholars and students of the NT.  I particularly like the stress on audio and video resources, and I've already found all sorts of things I did not know existed (like Chris Rowland lecturing on William Blake).  

I am looking forward to watching this site develop and to discovering lots of new resources.  I've added a link over on the NT Gateway, on the Biblical Resource Index Pages page.

Francis Watson discusses Gospel Writing

Eerdmans has posted a new interview, this time with Francis Watson, all about his excellent Gospel Writing: A Canonical Perspective. It's about 25 minutes long, and is in black and white for added gravitas:


HT: Matthew Montonini.

Library of New Testament Studies Latest

Here's the latest from the Library of New Testament Studies. Interested in making a proposal to the series? Please get in touch with me, or see the further information and proposal forms.

Bloomsbury Highlights The Library of New Testament Studies Series

The Library of New Testament Studies explores the many aspects of New Testament study including historical perspectives, social-scientific and literary theory, and theological, cultural and contextual approaches.

Attitudes to Gentiles in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity Edited by David C. Sim & James S McClaren Explores the attitudes to Gentiles in ancient Jewish literature and in many of the New Testament texts. More info » The Throne Motif in the Book of Revelation Laszlo Gallusz This volume argues that the throne motif constitutes the major interpretive key to the complex structure and theology of the book of Revelation. More info » The Elijah-Elisha Narrative in the Composition of Luke Edited by John S. Kloppenborg & Joseph Verheyden An examination of the composition of the gospel of Luke with reference to the Elijah-Elisha narrative. More info » The Earliest Christian Meeting Places Almost Exclusively Houses? Edward Adams Adams examines the evidence surrounding house churches in Early Christianity. More info »

Paul's Financial Policy A Socio-Theological Approach David E. Briones Investigates the reason for Paul's seemingly inconsistent financial policy, insofar as he accepts monetary aid from the Philippians but refuses it from the Corinthians. More info » A Scriptural Theology of Eucharistic Blessings Susan I. Bubbers This study shows the scriptural justification for the expectation that the Eucharist is a place where God will bless believers with freedom and formation. More info » 'God is One' The Function of 'Eis ho Theos' as a Ground for Gentile Inclusion in Paul's Letters Christopher R. Bruno Examines the two key Pauline texts that link the confession of God as one with the inclusion of the Gentiles. More info » Incorporated Servanthood Commitment and Discipleship in the Gospel of Matthew Ben Cooper Cooper argues the Gospel of Matthew was composed in part to evoke a commitment to God through which 'compliant' readers are made disciples of Jesus. More info »

See more in this series »

Bloomsbury Academic & Professional — Awards for Academic Excellence 2013 The Bookseller Academic, Educational & Professional Publisher of the Year Independent Publishers Guild Independent Publisher of the Year and Academic & Professional Publisher of the Year

© Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. 50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP No longer want to receive emails from this list? Unsubscribe.

 

The Apostle Paul - A Polite Bribe in New York

SVA Theater advertises A Polite Bribe, 19 December 2013

I have previously mentioned Robert Orlando's film A Polite Bribe, a documentary that uses animation and interviews with top New Testament scholars to tell a compelling narrative about Paul's life.  On 19th December, I was invited to the the New York City premiere of the film, and so I got a chance to see it on the big screen, to meet Robert Orlando and others involved with the film, and to witness a fascinating post-film discussion.

The screening took place in the SVA Theater in West 23rd Street in Manhattan which was, as it happens, just a short walk from my hotel.

Gerd Luedemann

It was great to see a film about the New Testament getting this kind of billing, and to see a New Testament scholar's name up in lights!  Gerd Luedemann, who features prominently in the film, was the guest of honour, and he gave a short lecture as a kind of pre-screening extra.  Prof. Luedemann's style is old-fashioned but authoritative -- he held open his book and read radical statements with a calmness that belied content that would be surprising to many in the audience.

Luedemann really came alive in the question and answer session, though, and when it was time to pause ahead of the pre-screening break, the questions from the audience were still coming thick and fast.

The film itself is quite original.  As regular readers will know, I am something of a consumer of documentaries about the New Testament, and I can't recall having seen anything quite like this.  Its chief focus is on Paul's collection for the saints in Jerusalem.  It tells the story of Paul's troubled relations with James, Peter and the other apostles in Jerusalem, and explains how he became fixated on what it calls his "polite bribe".

The film uses an unseen narrator and a unique animation style that somehow manages to capture the
sense of this as another world.  Orlando avoids usual documentary distractions of shots of present day Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth, and so on.  But most strikingly, the story is told primarily by means of multiple modern-day Biblical scholars.

Many of the top shots are there.  They include documentary regulars like Bart Ehrman and Tom Wright, new documentary stars like Candida Moss, and many I have not seen before on film, Philip Esler, Douglas Campbell, Amy-Jill Levine.  Orlando seems to get the best out of them all.  Ben Witherington III appears often and is surprisingly amusing.  Indeed, many of them appear relaxed and even humorous, perhaps because they all get a little more than the usual twenty second soundbites.

I was impressed by the way that the film manages to weave a story that scholars know well into a narrative that would be comprehensible and compelling to those with no knowledge of the field.  It's certainly something I would enjoy using in the classroom, but I suspect that those who will enjoy it most will be those who are unaccustomed to reflecting critically on Paul's biography.

Although the film occasionally utilizes the Acts narrative, it tells its story primarily by means of an epistles-based chronology, and it is this angle that will prove refreshing to scholars who try so hard to underline the importance of beginning with the letters.  And from a scholarly perspective, perhaps the most surprising thing -- and something I asked Orlando about in the Q&A that followed the screening -- is its integration of scholars from a variety of different perspectives who end up telling a continuous story, from Luedemann to Witherington, from Ehrman to Wright.

A Polite Bribe is not perfect, of course, and students and scholars of Paul will have their niggles.  I felt that it telescoped the separate Jerusalem visits of Galatians 1 and 2 in such a way as to make it a little confusing for those unfamiliar with the text, and I shared James McGrath's puzzlement over the conflation of the terms Nazarene and Nazirite.  Paul also becomes a more lonely and isolated figure in the film than I think is likely to have been the case given the friends and partners in mission that we repeatedly witness in the letters, but this is, I suppose, a necessity of effective story-telling.  Overall, though, the film does a great job of illuminating Paul's life by focusing on a key issue, the "polite bribe" of the title, that is little known outside of academic circles.

Gerd Luedemann, Robert Orlando & Dave Gibson

After the screening, there was a Q&A chaired by Dave Gibson of the Religion News Service in which Robert Orlando responded to questions about the film and how he put it together.  There was some (but much less) response also from Gerd Luedemann.

I'd recommend the film to anyone interested in Christian origins.  Several screenings have been advertised for the coming weeks, and we have one at Duke on 23 January, which I'll discuss further in due course.

Update (10.10pm): Joshua Paul Smith has an interview with Robert Orlando about the film on the Near Emmaus blog.

Skepticism about Jesus' Wife Papyrus in the Chronicle of Higher Education

The Chronicle of Higher Education has an article on the Gospel of Jesus' Wife.  The news is that there is no news:

Skepticism About 'Jesus' Wife' Papyrus Grows as Test Results Lag
Tom Bartlett

I checked again this week with Jonathan Beasley, assistant director of communications at the Harvard Divinity School. He wrote in an email that "we are waiting for final reports to come in on some of the testing, and, depending on the results, for a decision about whether to do further testing."

He couldn't provide an estimate of when testing might be completed. Ms. King declined to comment, writing in an email that she had nothing to add to Mr. Beasley's statement.

There are quotations from this blog and from Larry Hurtado's blog, and a mention of Andrew Bernhard.  Bartlett's conclusion is that:

Such a flashy discovery won't just fade away. At some point we'll find out whether or not it was a hoax. In the meantime it's fair to ask why it's taking so long.

Two quick comments:

(1) It is still not clear to me if Harvard themselves are arranging for these tests or whether the owner of the fragment is arranging for these tests.  A comment in January suggested the latter.  There is clearly a major difference between the one and the other.  Does the owner currently have the fragment or does Harvard have it?

(2) Bartlett mentions that "the papyrus had already been tested".  I have heard this mentioned on several occasions but I am not sure of the source of it.  Karen King's article does not confirm this; she writes:

Given the content of this text, we took into serious consideration whether this was a genuine ancient text or a modern forgery. It would be very difficult to reproduce the kind the damage from insects or moisture that the fragment indicates, but it could have been penned on a blank piece of ancient papyrus, which are available for purchase on the antiquities market. Such a papyrus would pass a Carbon 14 dating test.

In other words, she suggests that the fragment could pass a Carbon 14 dating test even if the text itself was composed in modernity; she does not confirm that such a test was undertaken.

Defining an Apocalypse and Making Toast

We have recently come to the end of the semester here at Duke and in my New Testament Introduction, we reached the Book of Revelation right at the end, just as one should.  One of the things I always like to stress to introductory students is that "Revelation" is the same word as "Apocalypse" and that understanding apocalyptic is not simply about eschatology but is also, more importantly, about the open heaven and the revelation of divine secrets.

While I was retailing the SBL Apocalypse Group definition from 1979, I couldn't help finding myself amused by an element in it.  Take a look:

"Apocalypse" is a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated  by an otherworldly being  to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world."

I've seen this and thought about this many times over the last twenty years or so, but what struck me on this occasion is that it contains the word being defined within the definition!  Since "revelation" is another way of saying "apocalypse", I can't help thinking that this is a bit like one of the recipes in a book I used to use as a student, The Gourmet Vegan by Heather Lamont.  In a section headed "Eating to Survive", the book helpfully explains how to make "toast" lest anyone is unfamiliar with the concept:

Toast
Used sliced wholemeal bread or bread buns, halved.  Toast until golden. Spread with vegan margarine, and any vegan jams, preserves, marmalades or Marmite . . ."

This used to strike me as hilarious.  The implied reader is a hypothetical (one might say non-existent) person who does does not know what "toast" is.  Should there be such an unlikely person who has purchased The Gourmet Vegan, they would hardly be helped in their ignorance of what "toast" is by invoking the verb "to toast".

It's worrying the kind of links that your mind makes when you are in the middle of teaching.  Perhaps it's just me.

The Apostle Paul - A Polite Bribe

Robert Orlando's documentary film about Paul, A Polite Bribe, premieres in New York City next Thursday, 19 December, at 8.10pm (poster to the left), where there will be a Q&A with the director as well as Gerd Luedemann.  The discussion will be moderated by David Gibson (Religious News Service).

I have not seen the film yet myself so I am looking forward to doing so.  There are trailers available here and lots of scholar clips available here (featuring, among others, Amy-Jill Levine, Bart Ehrman, Douglas Campbell, N. T. Wright and Daniel Boyarin).

There is more on the Polite Bribe website, and James McGrath has reviewed the film on his blog.

There is a screening planned in Durham, North Carolina on 23 January next year, more of which anon.

Whatever happened to the Gospel of Jesus' Wife?

Larry Hurtado ("Jesus Wife" Fragment: A Continuing Puzzle) has been raising questions about the Jesus' Wife Fragment, which was  announced with a great fanfare in September 2012 but which has now largely gone to ground.

The key issue here is that several scholars raised serious questions about the authenticity of the fragment, after which Karen King, Harvard Divinity School and the Harvard Theological Review all appeared to go quiet.  Nor has there been any public comment from the two other prominent scholars who originally supported the authenticity of the fragment, Roger Bagnall and AnneMarie  Luijendijk.

I won't repeat what Prof. Hurtado says in his blog post except to agree with his comments and to add some additional reflections of my own, born in part from continuing to think about this over the last year and more.

One of the issues here is that Harvard used the internet in a savvy way to publicize the claims, with excellent hi-def pictures published, a draft article, Q&As, video clips and so on. So we are not talking here about contrasting media.  This is not a case of blog-responses to published work. We are talking about responses within the same medium, responses, moreover, that were carefully considered, fair, detailed and rhetorically sensitive. If there are good answers to the critiques of Francis Watson, Andrew Bernhard, Leo Depuydt, Christian Askeland, Alin Suciu and others, then they need to be heard (see further: NT Blog: Gospel of Jesus' Wife).

As readers of those posts will know, I think the case for forgery is overwhelming.  But this does not mean that there is any shame in the early advocates of its authenticity explaining now that the case may not be as strong as they had originally thought. The internet brings something new and really valuable to scholarship, the availability of many eyes to look at something together in collaborative scholarship of a kind that was not available when, for example, Coleman Norton published his Jesus agraphon hoax.  (See further The Jesus' Wife Fragment and the Transformation of Peer Review?)

One concern that I would like to raise, though, is the following.  Where is the fragment now?  Is it still in the possession of Harvard Divinity School or not?  The report that I find troubling dates to January this year.  It is the most recent public comment about which I am aware:

"The owner of the fragment has been making arrangements for further testing and analysis of the fragment, including testing by independent laboratories with the resources and specific expertise necessary to produce and interpret reliable results. This testing is still underway," Kathyrn Dodgson, director of communications for the Harvard Divinity School, said in a email to CNN." (Still no news on the Jesus' Wife Fragment; emphasis added).

If the anonymous owner of the fragment is the one "making arrangements", is there any guarantee that we will ever see the results of these tests?  My question, therefore, is simple: where is the fragment now?

If it walks like a duck: Ossuary 6 of the Talpiot 'Patio' Tomb depicts commonly used Jewish images

I am delighted to be able to publish today a guest post from Wim G. Meijer about the images on the ossuary 6 in Talpiot Tomb B. Dr Meijer has been a reader of the NT Blog for a while and he has followed the story of the Talpiot Tombs with some interest. We have been corresponding in recent months about some fascinating observations that he has made about parallels with the images on Talpiot Tomb B, Ossuary 6, that shed light on those images. I encouraged Dr Meijer to write up his observations for the blog and I am delighted that he has now done so. Although this article is Dr Meijer's work, I would like to make clear that I find his observations enlightening and persuasive. His expertise is in a different discipline (Biomolecular and Biomedical Science), but I think his eye is sharp and his instincts right.
-----------------------------

If it walks like a duck: Ossuary 6 of the Talpiot 'Patio' Tomb depicts commonly used Jewish images

Wim G. Meijer, UCD School of Biomolecular and Biomedical Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland (wim.meijer@ucd.ie)

Tabor and Jacobovici identified ossuary 6 of the Talpiot 'resurrection' tomb (Talpiot patio tomb) as early Christian based on the presence of a cross on the side of the ossuary and the depiction of Jonah as a stick figure with his head wrapped in seaweed, apparently being spit out by a giant fish. In addition, it is claimed that the fish head also contains a Jonah inscription. If true, this would be the earliest example of these Christian images ever identified. Furthermore, Tabor and Jacobovici argue that the presence of this Christian tomb 60 meters from the controversial ‘Jesus family tomb’ (Talpiot garden tomb) supports their conclusion that Jesus and his family were buried there.

Figure 1: The ‘Yehosah’ ossuary
 (top panel) and the ‘cross’ in
 the middle of the ossuary
 (enlarged) compared to replica 1
 of ossuary 6 of the Talpiot tomb
 (bottom panel)

A golden rule in science is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Have they provided such extraordinary evidence? I don’t believe they have. In what follows below I provide what I believe is compelling evidence that the images on ossuary 6 are standard Jewish images of the period, not connected to the emerging Christian movement. Therefore, in my opinion ossuary 6 is not from a distinctively Christian ‘resurrection’ tomb, but from a tomb belonging to a normal Jewish family.

A cross is also present on the ‘Yehosah’ ossuary from a tomb belonging to a priestly family.

The ‘Yehosah’ ossuary, described by Asher Grossberg in the Biblical Archaeology Review, was discovered in a cave tomb in south-eastern Jerusalem (Grossberg, 1996). The ‘Yehosah’ ossuary displays a clearly identifiable cross in the centre (Fig. 1), with similar dimensions as the one on Talpiot ossuary 6. Clearly the cross on ossuary 6 is not unique, but is it Christian? The ‘Yehosah’ tomb contained a further seven ossuaries bearing the inscription of names that are closely associated with contemporaneous priestly and Levite names. This includes the name ‘Tarfon’, which is mentioned in the Talmud as belonging to priests performing duties in the Temple. Grossberg thus concludes that the Yehosah ossuary is from a tomb belonging to a priestly family. The cross on the Yehosah ossuary is therefore most certainly not a Christian symbol. Based on ancient descriptions of the Temple, Grossberg argues that the central image containing the cross is a depiction of the second Temple.


The depiction on the side of ossuary 6 is strikingly similar to images of the second Temple.

Tabor and Jacobovici focused on the cross on the side of ossuary 6 as a Christian symbol, and have not paid much attention to the image as a whole. However, when the entire image is taken into consideration (Fig. 2), one can not help but notice the striking similarities between this image with that on a coin struck during the Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 CE). This coin depicts a structure with two columns on each side, which is generally believed to be the facade of the second Temple. These two columns on each side are clearly visible on the side of ossuary 6 (Fig. 2). The columns flank an arched, dome like structure in both images, with at the centre a square, which on ossuary 6 is freestanding, while the sides are merged with the sides of the domed structure on the coin. However, based on the similarities it seems clear that these two contemporaneous images depict the same: the facade of the Temple. This imagery was not only used in the 1st and 2nd century CE, but is still present in many synagogues as the Aron Kodesh, housing the Torah scrolls (Fig. 2). It is arguably one of the oldest and most enduring images in Judaism.

Figure 2: Comparison of the image on the side of replica 1 of ossuary 6 to a coin
 struck during the Bar Kokhba revolt and an Ark Kodesh of the Rachmastrivk
a Hasidim, Jerusalem.

In summary, comparison of the image on the side of ossuary 6 to contemporaneous images on an ossuary belonging to a priestly family and to a coin of the Bar Kokhba revolt strongly suggests that the image on the side of ossuary 6 is Jewish, and most likely depicts the facade of the second Temple.

The image of the ‘fish’ is similar to vessels on contemporaneous coins of the first Jewish revolt.

Figure 3: Comparison between Temple
 vessels depicted on coins of
 the first Jewish revolt to the
vessel on replica 2 of ossuary 6.

The front of ossuary 6 depicts what Tabor and Jacobovici argue is a depiction of a large fish spitting out Jonah. If so this would be the earliest known use of this Christian image. During the first Jewish revolt (66-70 CE), ending in the destruction of the Temple, coins were struck displaying vessels that experts agree were used in Temple services, in particular wine libation, as is suggested by the presence of a grape leave on the other side (Fig 3). The vessels depicted on these coins have a mouth that is as wide or wider than the widest part of the vessel, and have two handles in the middle at the widest point of the vessel, just below the neck. The similarity of these vessels to the image on the ossuary is striking: this too has a mouth (the tail of the 'fish') that is wider than the widest part, and has two handles ('fins') in the middle at the widest part of the vessel just below the neck. The ‘fish’ thus has the same characteristics as the vessels depicted on contemporaneous Jewish coins.

If Tabor and Jacobovici are correct about their ‘fish’, then the critical part of the ‘fish’ image, defining it as Christian, is its mouth spitting out Jonah as a stick figure and containing a Jonah inscription. I cannot help but wonder that if this part of the image is all important then why is the tail of the fish depicted on the side of the ossuary and not Jonah? Without Jonah, the inscription and the fish head, there is nothing in this half image that has any Christian significance. However, depicting just the very wide mouth of a vessel used in Temple services still makes this half image instantly recognisable as a ritual vessel.

Conclusion

If ossuary 6 is early Christian, as claimed by Tabor and Jacobovici, it would have contained uniquely Christian images that are not shared with or have similarities to images on Jewish objects. However, the images on ossuary 6 also occur on contemporaneous Jewish coins and an ossuary belonging to a priestly family, which most likely depict the Temple and a vessel used in Temple rituals. Therefore both Occam’s Razor and the Duck test lead to one obvious, inescapable conclusion: Ossuary 6 is Jewish and does not have any connection with the emerging Christian movement.

Reference

Grossberg, A. ‘Behold the Temple: is it depicted on a priestly ossuary?’ Biblical Archaeology Review 22,3 (1996) 46-51, 66.

When two worlds collide: SBL & the Day of the Doctor

There will be lots of doctors walking around in tweedy jackets this weekend in Baltimore but sadly, most of them will be obsessing about their papers at the Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting this weekend and not about the matter of real interest to the rest of the world, the fiftieth anniversary of the longest running science fiction show of all time, Doctor Who, the first episode of which aired on 23 November 1963.

I've long realized that the two things would collide, Doctor Who's fiftieth birthday and this year's SBL Annual Meeting, and for many of us it has been an source of great anxiety.  Doctor Who is, of course, used to sharing the limelight with other momentous events.  That first episode, "An Unearthly Child", went out the day after JFK's assassination, also the day of C. S. Lewis's death.

I must admit that for a long time I was worried that I might just have to find some quiet corner somewhere and stream the anniversary episode, "The Day of the Doctor", on my laptop wearing my headphones.  In fact, I couldn't be sure if fate would dictate that I might have to give a paper or chair a session at the moment the fiftieth was airing.  Luckily, that did not come to pass.

So what are the options for those who are at the SBL for watching "The Day of the Doctor"?  As I see it, here are the options:

(1) Hardcore fans who are lucky enough not to be on the SBL programme will want to watch the live simulcast of "The Day of the Doctor".  The ideal way of doing this will be to go to one of the screenings in the cinemas.  Sadly, there are not many of these, and they are all sold out.  And the nearest one to Baltimore is Fairfax, VA, a good hour's drive from Baltimore.

(2) Another possibility would be to watch the live simulcast on BBC America.  However, posh American hotels are not known for their good access to cable, and BBC America is typically a "second tier" channel and so you are unlikely to get it in your hotel room.

(3) I'm grateful to Heather McMurray at SBL headquarters for the good news of another option for watching the fiftieth live -- the Sheraton Inner Harbor Hotel, Oriel Grill bar, has BBC America. Monica Floyd, the concierge, is putting them on notice for possible SBL watchers on Saturday, Nov 23 at 2:50pm.

(4) For those who simply can't do the simulcast because of other commitments, there is still some hope.  BBC America shows the episode again in the evening of Saturday 23rd, so if you can find a TV with BBC America, you'll be OK.  Or, I suppose, you could find a way of downloading and viewing it the same evening.  It will go on iTunes at some point, perhaps as early as Saturday evening.

(5) And then there are the Monday night cinema showings.  The good news here is that whereas there are only eleven cities showing the simulcast on Saturday, there are hundreds showing the episode on Monday evening.  The nearest to Baltimore is Owings Mills, which is about a 25 minute drive.

Luckily, I was able to go for option 1, and was at my computer the second the tickets went on sale, and it was a matter of great relief.  I have also gone for option 5 for my second and more relaxed viewing with friends too, for good measure.

Good luck finding the best way of watching the fiftieth!

"Tomb of Jesus" Volume from Eerdmans - Charlesworth Interview & Errors in the Blurb

Over on the EerdWord blog, there's a new video interview with James Charlesworth (on Youtube here) in which he discusses the forthcoming volume The Tomb of Jesus and his Family, the proceedings of the conference in 2008 in Jerusalem relating to the Talpiot Tomb.  Regular readers will know of my own interest in this tomb and my scepticism about the claims of Simcha Jacobovici that this tomb can be identified as the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family.

Charlesworth himself is non-committal in the interview.  He mentions the range of views covered in the volume and although he includes among the possibilities that it belonged to "Jesus' clan", he does not associate himself with this view as he has done on previous occasions (James Charlesworth on the "Jesus Family Tomb" and James Charlesworth on the "Jesus Family Tomb": follow-up).

Charlesworth also mentions the controversy that surrounded the Jerusalem conference in 2008 (see The Talpiot Tomb Controversy Revisited, Simcha Jacobovici responds to his critics and Charlesworth on the Talpiot Tomb Symposium) and he counsels greater co-operation and friendliness in the future.  He does not mention Simcha Jacobovici in the interview.

The interview was presumably filmed at SBL last year.  It looks like the same room as for my interview on Thomas and the Gospels.  The book itself is due to come out in December this year, after several delays.

I do want to quibble with the book's blurb, which features a couple of errors:

About twenty-five years ago archaeologists discovered a tomb near Jerusalem that contained a family's ossuaries — limestone bone boxes commonly used in ancient Near Eastern burial customs — inscribed with some familiar New Testament names: Mary, Joseph, James, Mary Magdalene, and Jesus. The Discovery Channel produced a film investigating "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," raising interest among the public and specialists alike. Could this actually be the tomb of Jesus and his family? [emphasis added].

The blurb appears on EerdWord, Youtube and the Eerdmans Website.  Quibbles:

• Minor quibble: the tomb was excavated in 1980, which is 33 years ago, a little more than "about twenty-five years".


• Major quibble 1: the tomb does not feature the name "Mary Magdalene".  If it did, it would have been a really remarkable find for the study of Christian origins.  The name is not there.


• Major quibble 2: the tomb does not feature the name "James". Although Jacobovici and Tabor have argued that the James ossuary came from the tomb, this is a controversial and problematic claim that cannot simply be stated as fact.

The list of (Anglicized) names should really be given instead: Jesus? Son of Joseph, Mary, Mariam (or Mariame) and Mara, Joses, Matthew, Judas son of Jesus.

Bible Secrets Revealed on History Channel, Wednesday

History Channel now has a website devoted to its new six-part documentary series about the Bible:

Bible Secrets Revealed

The site features the "sneak peak" previously mentioned and details about the first episode, Lost in Translation.

See also the interview with Robert Cargill, consulting producer on the series, in the Iowa City Press-Citizen.

The series premieres this Wednesday, 13 November, at 10pm.

Jerome Murphy O'Connor, O. P., 1935-2013

I was so sorry to hear of the death of Jerome Murphy O'Connor earlier today.  Not only was he a fine scholar, but he was also a kind-spirited, sweet-natured and generous human being, who always had time for for people.  I was only lucky enough to meet him on a couple of occasions, one time in London as he was exiting an art gallery as I was entering it.

Everyone spoke well of him.

Jerome Murphy O'Connor was a gifted writer, whose prose was always lucid and lively.  His scholarly insights were fascinating, even surprising (like his suggestion that Paul's wife died in a house-fire, or that the Galatians may well have had extraordinarily large moustaches).

See also comments from James McGrath, John Byron, Jim Davila, Jim West, James Tabor and many others.

A sad loss for the guild.

Bible Secrets Revealed Intro

Here's the first couple of minutes of the forthcoming History Channel series Bible Secrets Revealed:



This is taken from the Prometheus Entertainment website. Robert Cargill is consulting producer on the series and has more on his blog.  The series premieres next Monday 11 November on History Channel at 10/9C.