E-mail
Print
RSS
G-bookmarks
Live
TechnoratiIt wasn't the statistical process he used that flagged the analysis for Myers, but it was the Feuerverger information used to calculate those odds.
Most of that information centered around the reading of the inscriptions on the ossuaries which bore the names used in the analysis. One was interpreted to read "Mariemene e Mara" and in some early Christian texts was believed to refer to Mary Magdalene.
But epigraphers at the conference, however, contested the reading as "Mariemene e Mara" – a crucial part of the calculation.
Among them included Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem, who asserted at the conference and in earlier writings said the reading doesn't read "Mariamene" at all but instead "Mariame" and "kai Mara." According to a detailed article he published online last year, he said the ossuary housed the bones of two women, "Mary and Martha."
Citing inferences drawn by Camil Fuchs, head of Tel Aviv University's statistics department, Myers said there is almost no probability that the ossuary belonged to Mary Magdalene.
At the conference, an expert panel of scholars on the subject of Mary in the early church dismissed the link between "Mariamene" and Mary Magdelene. They also firmly rejected the suggestion that Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus and that they had a son.
Pfann also questioned whether the inscription, reportedly reading "Yeshua, the son of Joseph," could even be read.
"These are common names so it's impossible to equate them with familial relationships," commented Myers.
In addition to the problems associated the inscriptions and statistical analysis, Myers also pointed to holes in the analysis of the DNA taken from the bones found in the ossuaries.
Earlier reports indicated that the DNA taken from the bones of the two ossuaries were not related. But Christian theologians were quick to point out there was also no proof that the DNA belonged to Jesus.
In the most recent report, the head of the DNA laboratory at Hebrew University said that the sampling was invalid and contaminated, thereby eliminating any inferences that could be drawn between the non-familial relationship of the bones.
"It was not even worth discussion. That should have closed the case," said Myers of the contaminated DNA.
Myers also denounced a sensationalized remark made by Ruth Gat, the widow of the archaeologists who discovered the Talpiot tomb.
Upon receiving a lifetime achievement award on behalf of Joseph Gat, Ruth Gat said that her late husband always thought the tomb he uncovered belonged to Jesus but never published his opinion from fear of anti-Semitism.
"It's ridiculous," said Myers. "He couldn't read the epigraphy – the study of ancient scripts. He was not a scholar; he was just a technical field archeologist."
aritonang »
Agree: 
Disagree: 
