The James ossuary and the media spin

I find it interesting (and I usually get a little annoyed) when I watch the news and hear the interesting spins that they sometimes put on the stories. Take for example the “James ossuary”. I saw a news report on CBC about it the other night. This may be a small one but it’s an excellent example of how a few words can make a difference.

In case you didn’t hear the story, here it is online. It doesn’t contain the same wording as the TV news, although it has it’s own problems. The basic story is of a burial box that was believed to be from the 1st century. The inscription read,”James the brother of Jesus”, and so it was thought that this may be THE James and Jesus of the Gospels.

Recently Israeli experts decided that the inscription was a fake, although there is still a difference of opinion in the scholarly world (a fact which the TV news report stated clearly, although most of the online news does not), and some scholars are still studying it.

Now here’s where the weird wording comes in. The reporter said that this ossuary was an exciting find because it had been believed to be PROOF of the existance of Jesus Christ! Do you get it? Here’s the problem. How in the world is a bone-box that mentions James and Jesus PROOF of the existance of THE Jesus Christ? I’m no expert on names in the first century, but my understanding is that these are not unusual names. It could have been ANY James at all.

The reason the inscription was interesting, as I understand it, was this: knowing the history of Jesus ALREADY, it’s interesting that a burial inscription would identify someone with his brother, and not, for example, his father. In other words, it’s not in any way PROOF of the existance of Jesus Christ, but because we already KNOW that He existed, it’s an interesting find.

And so, as we listen to the rest of this broadcast, this is the impression we’re left with:
We thought that at LONG LAST we had PROOF that Jesus Christ REALLY existed!
But now it looks like it was a fake.
So once again we’re left with no evidence at all that Jesus Christ really existed. Oh well.

Of course they didn’t say that, but that’s the impression we’re left with. Now, come on. As far as I know, the debate is not really around whether or not He actually existed. There is an incredible amount of evidence that He did. The debate is more around what exactly He did and who exactly He was.

Anyway, the ossuary is interesting, and it will be interesting to see what else happens over the next few weeks. But don’t let anyone tell you that the last little scrap of evidence for Jesus’ existance is gone. Oh brother.