[QUOTE=Colibri]
Irrelevant. Years are still counted from an origin point (not year, point), which can be considered to be zero.
[/QUOTE]
Nyetski. What we’ve got here is a dating system rather like “Georgii Quinti Anno Sexto”, “In the sixth year of King George V”, and in that system, there’s no zero. The day before the first day of the reign of George V wasn’t Year Zero of George V, it was Year Eight of Edward VII. The day before the first day of 1 AD was the last day of 1 BC.
[QUOTE=jimmmy]
My statistical consultant gave me a very simple analogy: Imagine a football stadium filled with 50,000 people—men, women, and children. This is an average estimate of the population of ancient Jerusalem in the time of Jesus. If we ask all the males named Jesus to stand, based on the frequency of that name, we would expect 2,796 to rise. If we then ask all those with a father named Joseph to remain standing there would only be 351 left. If we further reduce this group by asking only those with a mother named Mary to remain standing we would get down to only 173. If we then ask only those of this group with a brother named Joseph only 23 are left. And finally, only of these the ones with a brother named James, there’s less than a 3/4 chance that even 1 person remains standing. Prof. Andre Feuerverger, of the University of Toronto, a highly regarded senior scholar in the field did the formal statistics for the Discovery project. His figure of probability came out to 1/600. His paper will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and parts of it are available on the Discovery Web site.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll go back and check this probability versus what he lists as the name frequencies.
I would also need to know which names are uncontested as relatives of Jesus. I’m not sure whether he includes those or not.
[QUOTE=jimmmy]
He probably knows more about the Dead Sea Scrolls than any but 10ish people (to pull a number out my a$$) on earth. IOW he is a “real” scholar with an unorthodox view of the Jesus story – with “real” credentails to back those unorthodox views
[/QUOTE]
I’d say there are a lot more experts than you’d expect. And the lack of any one other signing on makes me very suspicious.
jimmmy: does your statistical consultant address the issue I mentioned earlier? Joseph, Mary, etc., didn’t live in Jerusalem, so the whole excercise you went through is kinda pointless.
[QUOTE=Helen’s Eidolon]
I’d say there are a lot more experts than you’d expect. And the lack of any one other signing on makes me very suspicious.
[/QUOTE]
Well he is the real deal - that is the point. Tabor is unique in that he is both a Scholar (a non-Archeologist) and works with the Israeli Antiquities Agency in the Field (which is how he came to write about the Taproot tomb in the first place).
Doesn’t mean he isn’t insane? I’ll buy that. Doesn’t mean he isn’t lying?OK Doesn’t mean he isn’t mistaken? Absolutely. Doesn’t mean he doesn’t know more than you or me or the guy who taught you in College or anyone in this thread or on the board or anyJoe posting on the Internet? No that is wrong.
I share the skepticism but think the sniff at the credentials is loud wrong
[QUOTE=Diceman]
jimmmy: does your statistical consultant address the issue I mentioned earlier? Joseph, Mary, etc., didn’t live in Jerusalem, so the whole exercise you went through is kinda pointless.
[/QUOTE]
To be clear I was quoting from a blog. I didn’t do any analysis.
Having said that, since Acts say that James Jesus’ brother lived in Jerusalem and was executed there and his Mother was in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ death and Jesus died there, I am not sure the idea of the Jesus family traipsing back to the Galilee with corpses holds quite the logical weight and consistency that you do.
[QUOTE=Chronos]
Apparently, this tomb contains a father of Jesus named Joseph and also a brother named Joseph. Of course, that latter is completely irrelevant, since the only Joseph said to be related to the Biblical Jesus was dad..
[/QUOTE]
Matthew 13:55 Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas?
…and I know in the rest of your post Chronos you go on to say it’s still not an independant probability, since many boys were named after their fathers - but I wanted to point that out.
Rucksinator he posted more on the Statistics today.
I’m satisfied with the name frequencies in the PDF scm1000 posted. Anyone feel free to visit the GD thread who wishes to debate the topic. Moderators, feel free to lock this thread.
[QUOTE=Scuba_Ben]
By way of example, when was the last time anybody here used the word “zeroeth”?
[/QUOTE]
It is a relatively uncommon word. Google gives only 34,400 hits.
However, if you spell it correctly as zeroth, Google finds 1,570,000 hits. By way of comparison, Scuba gives 1,830,000 hits.
So it’s not uncommon at all, I’d say.
I’m not saying he isn’t qualified as a professor. Amazingly enough, sometimes even qualified professors are wrong. My point was, instead, that his field is really not so specialized that he’s only one of ten or so qualified to comment on it. It’s a popular field of study, and his CV really isn’t even that spectacular - it’s pretty average.
[QUOTE=jimmmy]
<snip>
My statistical consultant gave me a very simple analogy: Imagine a football stadium filled with 50,000 people—men, women, and children. This is an average estimate of the population of ancient Jerusalem in the time of Jesus. If we ask all the males named Jesus to stand, based on the frequency of that name, we would expect 2,796 to rise. If we then ask all those with a father named Joseph to remain standing there would only be 351 left. If we further reduce this group by asking only those with a mother named Mary to remain standing we would get down to only 173. If we then ask only those of this group with a brother named Joseph only 23 are left. And finally, only of these the ones with a brother named James, there’s less than a 3/4 chance that even 1 person remains standing. Prof. Andre Feuerverger, of the University of Toronto, a highly regarded senior scholar in the field did the formal statistics for the Discovery project. .
[/QUOTE]
Except:
We do not know if the Mary is the Mother. So we have to ask everyone who has a Mary related to them.
It’s Matthew not Joseph and Jesus did not have a Brother named Matthew. Nor is the Matthew in the tomb identified as the brother of the Jesus in that tomb
Nor is there a James there.
So we still have 351 dudes standing. And even that is suspect as scm1001 said. So, it’s hardly all that unlikely.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
It is a relatively uncommon word. Google gives only 34,400 hits.
However, if you spell it correctly as zeroth, Google finds 1,570,000 hits. By way of comparison, Scuba gives 1,830,000 hits.
So it’s not uncommon at all, I’d say.
[/QUOTE]
Now I’m going to have to see how many of those hits for zeroeth/zeroth lead to something other than the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics or the Zeroth Law of Robotics.
(BTW, I have actually used the word “zeroth” in normal conversation. Once.)
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Except:
From what I’ve read, genetic tests conducted on the bones showed that the Mary and Jesus in question were not blood relatives. This caused our crackpot hero to conclude that the Mary was Mary Magdalene, and she was Jesus’ wife. :rolleyes:
It sounds like someone has seen The DaVinci Code too many times.
Apparently, our boy has also decided that the James ossuary, which the Israeli government declared a fake, and which some other dude is being prosecuted for, is legit and of course it came from the same crypt that his ossuaries did.