[SERay]

The implications of such a heretical claim is mind boggling. Simcha Jacobovici is notably controversial and this is an opportunity to potentially cash in on some of the sensationalism. I am confident Simcha's Jewish zeal was a large part of the motivation. James Cameron was certainly involved for the investment. James is strict with finances and he would not get behind anything that was not a sure profit.

Please read complete published article here: http://www.eternalpath.com/jesustomb.html

[sword]

Hello:

From your article in Christianity Today:

"It is not difficult to conclude that Jacobovici is sensationalising an archeological find for the sake of notoriety and financial gain." I disagree. Investigate Jacobovici's background: he is someone who has a great deal of chauvinism towards his own religion and ethnicity. While that is unremarkable in a general sense, when you consider that his religion and ethnicity are that of Orthodox Judaism, then it becomes clear. Contemporary Christians are unwilling to state this in public forums or polite company for fear of being labeled anti -Semites, but the truth is that Jews loathe the existence of Christianity, and Orthodox Jews even more so. The usual reasons given are their fears of persecution at the hands of Christians, but the truth is that the claims of Christianity: that Jesus Christ was the Jewish Messiah and God in the flesh and the Word portion of the God that exists eternally in Tri - Unity who died as a blood sacrifice for our sins so that we could be resurrected to eternal life with God - deeply offends them. It is not enough to say that they denied the story from day one, but they OPPOSED it; sending Jesus Christ and his followers to the Romans to be crucified. So of course modern Jews, the descendants of the Pharisees of the times of the New Testament (the Sadducees ceased to be with the destruction of the temple) are still doing all that they can to destroy a religion that they see not so much as false, but personally offensive. That is why Jewish groups have done all they can to promote and confer legitimacy on liberal and apostate "Christian" bodies who deny the deity of Christ, the literal interpretation of the Bible, and the inerrancy of scripture. It was only recently, when certain groups began to turn on Jews by calling on divestiture from Israel, that Jews began to point towards theologically conservative (but often doctrinally suspect!) evangelicals. The tactics are generally the same: they hold "interfaith dialogues" where first they demand that Jews not be targeted for conversion, then they point to areas of the New Testament that are "anti - Semitic", "hurtful", "have led to persecution in the past", or are "counterproductive" and suggest that they no longer be taught, or "should only be taught in their proper context." Then they introduce their "experts" ("Christian" in addition to Jewish) who are able to make an excellent cases that the things and events described in the gospels COULDN'T POSSIBLY have happened as depicted, because there are SO MANY logical errors, confused dates, and contradictions. And then they talk about how Hebrews and the apostolic letters are SO HARSH in their depiction and treatment of Jews, obviously done so in order to please the Romans and get them to convert so the persecution would cease, so PLEASE stop relying on those as well. Then Revelation, which states that Jews will accept Jesus as the Messiah one day - has to be discarded as well. Instead, we are told that Christians and Jews ARE BOTH AWAITING THE SAME MESSIAH! By the time that a pastor is done with these "interfaith exchanges", he either denies his entire religion or agrees to no longer preach and teach it. Which, of course, is fine with them. The fewer people going around claiming that Jesus Christ was the God in the flesh Messiah whom they rejected and sent to the Romans to be crucified only to have Him rise again and be accepted by the Gentiles instead, the less offense they have to endure. (The comments on this prominent Orthodox Jewish weblog that I read from time to time: they LOVED the Da Vinci Code, and took glee in the reports that Christians were abandoning their faith over it! Similar comments were expressed on the comment boards on the Jerusalem Post's website when reports of the movie's airing first came out: "hopefully the claims of this movie will be verified, and this false religion will finally die out!")

Interesting that in an article on the Jerusalem Post's website, Jacobovici DENIED that he was trying to destroy Christianity. Oh no, he claimed, he had much respect for Christians and their values, traditions, history, etc. He claimed that his movie would actually HELP CHRISTIANITY by "correcting thefalse impression that it is based on a deity, and that a stronger, better Christianity would emerge." Do we need any more evidence that such was his entire goal in making the movie? It had nothing to do with money; you don't make any money by putting your documentary on low profile basic cable. It was all about attempting to undermine Christianity. Jacobovici knows that the claims in the movie are unsupported (that is, unless in his zealotry he has convinced HIMSELF that they are true, which is possible but unlikely), but so long as he gives yet another line of ammunition so the people that deny the Bible can use not only in the media, but also in our very religion colleges and seminaries that train our pastors (where "The Da Vinci Code" and "The Gospel of Judas" were huge hits), then he will have accomplished his goal of striking a huge blow in the undermining of Christianity, maybe if not today definitely 20 from now when the second full generation of preachers will have been educated in religion schools, seminaries, and Bible colleges that now view the gnostic heresies as being more legitimate than the Bible, and where Bible deconstructionism is a far bigger field of interest than is apologetics. And this is not Jacobovici's first contribution in this area, either. "Secrets of the Ancient World: James, Brother of Jesus?" was another broadside.

Christians should not allegations of anti - Semitism, nor the rise of "Christian Zionists" like John Hagee (once an uncompromising Biblie literalist who after making political ties in the American and Israeli Jewish community has recently taken to publicly preaching that neither he nor his church will evangelize Jews, and that Jesus Christ was killed by the Romans because of his political beliefs) prevent them from seeing, publicly stating, and CONTENDING AGAINST Jews who are opposing the true gospel of Jesus Christ. People like Simcha Jacobovici and Jewish leaders who are going around demanding changes from Bible publishers, religious schools and colleges, denominations, and pastors deserve to be viewed and treated no differently than the World Council of Churches, Katharine Jefferts Schori, or any of the other group that denies the Bible and demands that all else do as well. Thank you.

http://www.healtheland.bravehost.com/
http://www.healtheland.wordpress.com/

[SERay]

Thank you for your comments Job! Very thought provoking, containing a wide gamut of content. I will concur with your first comment, whereas the article was edited by various publications to fit. The unabridged article found on the website HERE reads: "It is not difficult to conclude that Jacobovici is either sensationalizing an archeological find for the sake of notoriety and financial gain or even worse, zealously ****ing his soul by undermining the supernatural divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ."

And regarding the other point, the article does quantify Jacobovici's passion within the caption of his large photo "Simcha Jacobovici is an award winning and controversial documentary director and producer whose work deals primarily with controversies in Jewish history." and I also clarified "Jacobovici... An observant Jew with an interest in Biblical history" meaning he had more vested in the project than just income potential. His life IS dedicated to the cause of Orthodox Judaism and the documentary was a feeble attempt to advance his cause.

[Christians and Jews ARE BOTH AWAITING THE SAME MESSIAH!]

Christians under the blood of Christ are awaiting the reigning King, Jews are awaiting the conquering lion to set wrongs right. I agree there are some common passions, but there are also some clear differences.

[It had nothing to do with money; you don't make any money by putting your documentary on low profile basic cable.]

True in that regard, but books sales are spiraling similar to "The Secret". This is a cash cow and the Discovery Channel has partial rights on the royalties, thus their 3.5 million invested expecting a profit. James Cameron will not gamble his time on any project that doesn't spell profit.

[It was all about attempting to undermine Christianity.]

I would agree with this, I do believe this is his primary motivation.

"The Da Vinci Code", "The Gospel of Judas" which I wrote on and received many center spreads HERE and now this undermining work will have little influence upon Christendom whereas the common thread is mystical and erroneous Gnostism. Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian, Hippolytus and other early scholars of the faith would have had a grand time with the old heresies being resurrected today as if they had any substance. I am sure some of those who profess Christ will fall away, primarly those not grounded in the faith. The pruning work of the gardener is constantly in process to keep the tree healthy by removing the unfruitful and the trimmed branches are gathered and shall be cast into the fire. (John 15:1-6)

[ufojoe]

I could care less if Simcha is Jewish or Buddhist. If the evidence holds up to scrutiny, it won't be because of the religion of anybody involved. By the way, Discovery Channel made the filmmakers cut out the last hour of the show. It was supposed to be three hours. The extra hour contained more science.

There was a story that went around all over the net and on many news stations. The story stated that the Mariamne inscription was wrong and that
it actually said Mary and Martha. Of course, the press didn't follow up and tell you the rest of the story.

Here's a blog entry from James Tabor, who was featured in the Discovery documentary. Tabor is Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte where he has taught since 1989. He previously held positions at the University of Notre Dame (1979-85) and the College of William and Mary (1985-89). His undergraduate and M.A. degrees were in Biblical Languages (Pepperdine University), and his Ph.D. is from the University of Chicago in the area of Biblical Studies, with an emphasis on Christian Origins and ancient Judaism, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, John the Baptist, Jesus, James, and Paul.

* * * * *

March 15, 2007
Leah Di Segni on the Pfann “Correction” of Rahmani
Filed under: Tabor's Blog — James Tabor @ 7:24 pm

When Stephen Pfann announced his “corrected reading” of the Talpiot inscription (IAA 80.500) as published by L. H. Rahmani (#701) just four days ago, insisting the veteran epigrapher had missed a word (kai/and), and misread the name Mariamne, I must admit it gave me pause. I am no epigrapher but I had studied the inscription carefully over the course of two years and nothing that Pfann was proposing rang true to me. It looked to me like a clear and lovely inscription of one hand, with the “stroke” or eta before Mara indicating a double name or signum of one woman. I also had a tremendous respect for Rahmani having worked through his Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries quite carefully over the years. I posted my reservations on my Blog.

I was amazed at how quickly Pfann’s reading was picked up by the media and flashed around the world with headlines such as: “Expert Shows Fatal Flaw in Tomb Theory.” I even watched Dr. Pfann on CNN two nights ago and I think he made the rounds on a few other national TV programs. I just did a Google search and that story has now become the “truth,” since it has been printed in over 12,000 sources, including multiple Christian Blogs that welcome anything that seems to contradict the “Mary Magdalene” hypothesis. I was also surprised to see Pfann’s paper this morning up on the SBL Web site and I posted a caveat to Forum editor Leo Greenspoon suggesting that maybe the Pfann reading might bear a bit of “peer review” by a Greek epigrapher, since it would surely be taken by the public as a new breakthrough in the discussion if posted on an academic site without comment. [Pfann has written me since I put up this post that he did in fact consult with several leading epigraphers who agree, or partly agree, with his reading, but that it was the Associated Press that rushed the story out without mentioning anyone but him]

Immediately after reading Pfann’s paper I met with Prof. Michael Stone, who is our distinguished visiting professor of ancient Judaism here at UNC Charlotte this year, and who happens to have been Pfann’s teacher. I asked him for his opinion, and quite modestly he said, I have no expertise in ancient Greek epigraphy so I would not dare to say, but if you check with Leah Di Segni you will get a view that should settle things for all of us. I was impressed with Michael’s modesty since those of us who know him know that his Greek is as good as it gets, as are all his languages, but he still knows that technical training in epigraphy is quite different from one of us who reads Greek texts taking a turn at such things.

I contacted Dr. Di Segni, hesitant to impose on her time, but she graciously said she would take a look. I just heard from her today. She contextualized her view with a statement of how highly she regards Rahmani and expressed surprise that anyone proposing to “correct” him would not ask him, his “eye” being as good today as it ever was. Dr. Di Segni recalls that she was consulted by Rahmani when he prepared the Greek inscriptions and she writes: “I well remember that, while here and there I had some suggestions about interpretation of a particular form (for instance, Mariamenon being an hypochoristic form of Mariam), I could not but confirm all his readings. I have not changed my mind now.”

Di Segni’s conclusion then and today: She reads the inscription as a double name, Mariamenou/Mara, both being personal names, or signum, indicated in this inscription by a single “stroke” (signifying ho kai or he kai so-and-so), thus one woman with a double name. This is much like saying “aka” or “also known as.” Di Segni is not of the view that Mara is an epithet, “Mistress Mariamenon”: if so, it would precede the name of the lady. She notes that this use of the double name or signum became common only in the late first century, so this would be a rather early occurrence, if one accepts the reasonable surmise that secondary burial in ossuaries in Jerusalem ended with the destruction of the city in 70 CE.

I pass this on to readers here and colleagues and I hope it will get posted on the SBL site and on some of the more responsible Blogs, to offer some context to Dr. Pfann’s paper. How one might contact the hundreds of papers or the TV programs that have carried the Rahmani “correction” around the world I have no idea.

In the meantime, back to the discussion of this ancient lady, Mariamne also know as Mara.