Let me just stop LoC right there and remind everyone that just yesterday he bid us farewell
Yet he couldn't even stay away for more than 24 hours, LOL. But I notice that he sure enough has stayed away from the "Why the Bible is correct" thread, which so thoroughly documents his repeated fails.
And now we can chalk up this latest post as yet another one.
Claiming to be the brother of a god was a common claim back in those days. Josephus, for instance, one writer often appealed to as recording the claim that James was the brother of Jesus, Josephus also wrote that Caligula claimed to be the brother of Zeus. And Caligula was a contemporary of the New Testament authors and this alleged James.
Even if we find an ossuary, or mausoleum, or coffin, or whatever, that contains Caligula's body, and even if it includes his aforementioned claim to be the brother of Zeus, such an artifact would not serve as any evidence for the existence of a historical Zeus.
Caligula's claim is no more or less valid than James'.
Moreover, LoC's post shows that he misses the obvious fact that Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch being innocent does not equate to the ossuary being authentic.
It simply means that THEY
were not the ones who forged it.
It also means that if a forgery, the fraudulence is part of the original itself and not something that was added later. In other words, there's no good evidence that the inscription is a later interpolation added to the box, it was most likely part of the box from its very beginning.
That doesn't mean it's "authentic", it would simply mean that, if it does turn out to be fraudulent, then the real fraud would be the person who made the box in the first place, and not Golan or Deutsch.
So the court ruling does not equate to this being the gospel James.
And even if James, it does not equate to him being the brother of Jesus, anymore than a tomb of Caligula would equate to him being the brother of Zeus, as just pointed out above.
Remember, as Robert pointed out earlier here, Origen alluded to James' brotherhood to Jesus as having been meant in a spiritual sense, just as Christians today call each other 'brother' and 'sister', and hell, even 'Father' sometimes.
Also remember, the title of this thread is "Bone-Box No Proof of Jesus
", not "No Proof of James", and in that respect, the title is very much correct, even if that is the same James referenced by the New Testament.
Now, one last thing:
The possibility of another
2. son of joseph ,
3.brother of Jesus
4. dated to the same time when James, brother of Jesus , was martyred
Is slim to none, making the ossuary 99.9% biblical .
Now just how, pray tell, did LoC come to that percentile? Anyone want to take a stab at breaking down the math for us?