Trial Does Not Settle "Brother of Jesus" Controversy

According to Robert Eisenman, author of "James, Brother of Jesus," the true successor to the movement we now call Christianity was indeed James and not Peter.

As the ossuary finding was announced, it immediately stirred a scientific controversy. Eisenman, professor of biblical archaeology at California State University, Long Beach, was the first expert to doubt its authenticity, in a Discovery News interview. "Several things cast suspicion: The line of custody is insecure, and the inscription is too perfect. They would have never written 'brother of Jesus' in the first century," he told me.

The ossuary was first displayed to the public at the Royal Ontario Museum in 2002, where it was viewed by almost half a million visitors. Around the same time, another unique finding resurfaced. Known as the "Jehoash Inscription," the stone tablet was presented as a building inscription describing, in ancient Hebrew script, the renovation work done on the first biblical temple by King Jehoash nearly 3,000 years ago.

It was supposedly the only surviving item of the First Temple ever, constituting evidence of its existence and authentication of the biblical text appearing in the Book of Chronicles. "The appearance of the two items in late 2002 and early 2003 fired the imaginations of millions of Christians around the world, who received tangible proof of Jesus’ family, and of thousands of Jews who ostensibly now had physical evidence from the First Temple and archaeological verification of the biblical stories," the Israel Antiquities Authority said in a statement.

After consulting with experts, the IAA concluded that the items were forged "for the purpose of damaging archaeological research, and creating a false impression of the historical evidence, which influenced the belief of millions of people throughout the world -– and all of it was done capriciously, in order to achieve financial gain." A complaint was filed with the Israel police, the principal suspect being Oded Golan, who was in possession of the two objects.

The trial stretched over more than 100 hearings. "It is not every day that a court hears a case involving as many topics as this one: archaeology, history, Bible, chemistry, geology, linguistics and more. Testimony was heard on subjects never before discussed or ruled on in court," Judge Aharon Farkash wrote in his ruling.

At the end, "the prosecution failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt what was stated in the indictment: that the ossuary is a forgery and that Mr. Golan or someone acting on his behalf forged it," the verdict said. However, the judge did emphasize that it was not possible to determine that the finds presented in the trial –- including the ossuary and the "Jehoash inscription" –- are not forgeries. "We can expect this matter to continue to be researched in the archaeological and scientific worlds and only the future will tell. Moreover, it has not been proved in any way that the words ‘brother of Jesus’ definitely refer to the Jesus who appears in Christian writings," the 475-pages-long ruling said.

Eisenman was not surprised by the verdict. He had already predicted it in a Huffington Post article written last year. "Courts can't determine these things, especially in view of contradictory evidence from so-called experts," Eisenman told Discovery News. "Anyhow, they can't evaluate 'internal evidence.' No one would have even thought about a 'Jesus' being important at that point. Only people nowadays would think that," he said.

By Rossella Lorenzi