 |
|
Title: The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence That Could Change History
ISBN: 0061192023
Author:
Simcha Jacobovici
Charles Pellegrino
Publicate Date: 2007-03-01
Publish: 2007-03-01
List Price: $27.95
Average Customer Rating: 3.5
Format: Hardcover
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $1.57
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $0.67
Amazon Merchant Price: $18.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: Fascinating read; well-proven theory
Using statistics, DNA traces, electron microprobes and archeological records, Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino explore the theory that a tomb unearthed in 1980 in Israel - about half-way between Bethlehem and Nazareth - is the actual tomb of Yeshua bar Yosef ... Jesus son of Joseph. Also buried in this tomb were two women - one named Maria and the other Mariamne - as well as an additional 7 people. While a few of the ossuary boxes were unmarked, enough contained names directly related to the story of Jesus as outlined in archeological, historical and Scriptural documents to statistically claim this was indeed the tomb of Jesus and his family.
So why has this gone unremarked for so long? Most people just don't want to know - it challenges their belief systems, and creates a great deal of controversy. Jesus married? Jesus with a son? Preposterous, the people say.
But the authors present a compelling and well-researched argument. The text is well written and carefully researched and I found it quite a fascinating read. Those who are interested in the archeological and historical study of New Testament persons should find this invaluable in their libraries.
|
2: Archaeo-porn - fiction worthy of "the Da Vinci Code"
Simcha Jacobovici has written an exciting book that is guaranteed to be controversial. Unfortunately for Simcha, his name has never been well respected in archaeological circles, and I think that the disappointing reviews this book has gotten from respected archaeologists won't improve his stature.
The inconsistencies and poor research used in this book have been better documented elsewhere. Suffice to say that this book reads as if the author started with the assertion that he alone has uncovered the tomb of Jesus Christ. He then goes on to select only that research that can be interpreted to support this assertion, while selectively ignoring research that proves him absolutely wrong. After marketing this poor research by disguising it as archaeology, poor Simcha attempted to ignore the onslaught of contradictory evidence with an attitude of "if I don't see it, it isn't there". We all know what happens when pedestrians cross busy streets with that attitude.
Many devout Christians will be quick to denounce this book, while others that are initially prejudiced to support Simcha's claims will hail this book as nothing less than a masterpiece. That's to be expected, because both parties come to this book not to be educated, but to be vindicated in their own personal beliefs. Their minds are made up before they even hold this book in their hands. That's to be expected, isn't it?
But even a cursory read of this book makes you feel as if you are being deceived. He starts with a tomb located miles away from where Jesus supposedly died. Reading the names on the tombs, you see a list of the most wildly popular names found at that time. To claim that this is the tomb of Jesus Christ is like finding a Cuban parchment with the names George, John, and Tom on it and insisting it's about the first three U.S. Presidents. With enough generic evidence and good enough P.R., you can appear to prove anything.
Archaeology is like golf - at first, you think it looks easy; but after awhile you are shocked to discover that it takes years and years of training to get it right. Unfortunately, Simcha's degree is in International Relations, which qualifies him to best work in Public Relations or International Marketing. The rumors persist that he is still looking for a University to grant him an honorary degree in archaeology, something that a man of his personality would receive with estatic joy. Sadly, Simcha has no background or training in that field, and he still can't get published in any respected archaological journal.
After Simcha embarassed himself at the Princeton Symposium in January 2008, the kindest thing I can say about embattled Simcha is this: while he is very good at creating drama out of nothing, his impatient desire for the spotlight (which he craves more than Hitler wanted Poland) has caused him to trample archaeology under his feet.
I believe Simcha to be a kind and gentle person, but someone needs to take him by the hand and make him realize that SCIENCE, and not fictional sensationalism, is the way to receive acceptance and recognition by your peers.
|
3: An Amazing Discovery
If true, the discovery of the tomb of Jesus and his family is astonishing, but the two-headed beast (Government and Religion) has reared up and is doing its utmost to quash this discovery. One can understand the 'beast' however. If the tomb of Jesus were to become public knowledge it could shatter the myths Christianity has encased in stained glass for the last 2,000 years. People, it seems, are afraid of the truth.
|
4: Poor reasoning, little proof.
The basic argument is that the probability of ossuaries having this cluster of names is too high to be anything other than the Jesus family tomb, but there is little in the way of real proof. Glaring inconsistencies are explained away, often with strained logic. First, the fact that there even is an ossuary (bone box) of Jesus is viewed as not a problem, since according to the authors most Christians believe Jesus' assent to heaven was a spiritual, not physical, event. This is simply not true: One of the basic beliefs of Christianity is in the assent of the physical body of Jesus (and in Roman Catholic tradition, the Virgin Mary) into heaven. They explain the presence of the Jesus ossuary by claiming that the disciples stole the body of Jesus from the tomb before the Roman Guard was posted and placed the body in another hidden tomb. Again, this goes against the basic beliefs of Christianity in the physical resurrection of Jesus. One of the ossuaries is inscribed 'Judah, son of Jesus.' The fact that Jesus is never said to be married let alone to have a son is explained away as a need to use 'code' to protect the wife and son of Jesus from Roman authorities. They propose that the son of Jesus may actually be 'The Beloved Disciple' or the apostle Thomas. However the gospels were likely written more than 50 years after the death of Jesus so there would be no need to hide the identity of a son. There is one ossuary that went missing after the tomb was found in the 1980's: 10 were originally described, but only 9 are presently accounted for. You may remember the discovery of an ossuary inscribed `James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' that was the subject of much controversy a few years ago. The authors simply decide that the James ossuary is the missing ossuary from the tomb. There are many other examples, including explanations why some of the names are written in Greek and Latin instead of Hebrew. There is simply very little real science and much "We think this must be true and it should be true so that makes it true."
|
5: articulat history
This is so easy fir anyone to understand, but what is more important, it shows the maticulate research done before making these assumptions.
|
|
|
|
|
