Will the IAA Return the James Ossuary to Oded Golan?

The IAA is scheduled to return the ossuary inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” to collector Oded Golan.

The Israel Antiquities Authority is scheduled to return the famous ossuary, or bone box, inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” to Oded Golan, the Israeli collector who owns it, after a five-year trial charging that he forged the Jesus reference in the inscription.*

In March 2012, the trial judge Aharon Farkash acquitted Oded Golan of the forgery charge. Stung by the verdict, state prosecutor Dan Bahat (not the eminent Israeli archaeologist of the same name) mounted an appeal of some aspects of the verdict, but not the James Ossuary. The government apparently accepted as final the judge’s decision regarding the ossuary. On July 18, Bahat’s superiors in the office of the State’s Attorney announced to the Israel Supreme Court that it was withdrawing the appeal on other aspects of the verdict.

The state is still asking the Supreme Court to confiscate several hundred other objects taken from Golan’s collection, including the Yehoash tablet, which, if authentic, would be the only known royal Israelite (actually, Judahite) inscription. It describes repairs to the Temple. But the government is not asking to confiscate the James Ossuary. Apparently, it intends to return it to Golan.

A hearing before the Supreme Court is scheduled for July 31 to consider the government’s request to confiscate the Yehoash inscription and other items from Golan’s collection. But this does not include the James Ossuary.

Editor’s note: Earlier today, acquitted trial co-defendant Robert Deutsch wrote on the Ancient Near East-2 message board that the prosecutors remained only with the effort to “confiscate the [Yehoash] tablet and the ossuary together with some 280 items out of the 3000 artifacts from Golan’s collection, which were taken 9 years ago as evidence for the court.” This is inaccurate – the ossuary is not included among the objects still under request for confiscation.

*See Hershel Shanks, “Brother of Jesus” Inscription Is Authentic!BAR July/August 2012.

For more information on the James Ossuary and the forgery trial, visit the Bible History Daily James Ossuary Forgery Trial Resources Guide page, featuring over one dozen links on the trial and artifacts.

Download the FREE eBook James, Brother of Jesus: The Forgery Trial of the Century.

Posted in News, Artifacts and the Bible, Cultural Heritage.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Add Your Comments

4 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  • Rolf says

    Is it not true that there is no actual word in Aramaic for “brother?”

  • JOSEPH says

    Shanks’ article on the ossuary is excellent, and shows that it is indeed reasonable to conclude that the box is authentic, and that it is quite likely that the James being referred to is the brother of Jesus (Y’shua).

    Remember, Shanks is a Jew, not a Christian, and has no personal reason to desire this to be authentic.

    As a Christian (and former atheist) I am always interested in these things. However, we don’t need the ossuary or shroud or any other relic. There are plenty of other credible evidences.

    Those who deny the existence of Jesus of Nazareth expose themselves as fools. It is fair to question his divinity and his resurrection, but it is just plain stupid to question his existence. You have to completely ignore history to do so.

    to John – Catholics will affirm Mary’s prepetual virginity in spite of this. The bible itself names Jesus’ brothers, and refers to his sisters, and history (ante-Nicene writings and even Josephus) is filled with references to his siblings, and they still say “just cousins.” So this won’t make a difference – that theology is not likely to ever budge.

  • John says

    Don’t think anyone needs to prove the “existence” of Jesus of Nazareth. There are well know extra-biblical (e.g. Josephus for one) that do that. The influence of Jesus is self evident from world history “Anno Domini”.
    The importance of this artifact is for Roman Catholics who adhere to the dogma that Mary was/is “ever virgin” and had no other children by Joseph.

  • 1 2 3

    Some HTML is OK

    or, reply to this post via trackback.

Send this to a friend

Hello! Your friend thought you might be interested in reading this post from https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org:
Will the IAA Return the James Ossuary to Oded Golan?!
Here is the link: https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/artifacts-and-the-bible/will-the-iaa-return-the-james-ossuary-to-oded-golan/
Enter Your Log In Credentials...

Change Password