Dr. Robert R. Cargill on the Archaeological Evidence for Jesus

The following is a clip from a lecture by Robert R. Cargill, Ph.D. in his course, "Jerusalem, the Holy City" on May 11, 2010 at UCLA.

This lecture discusses the archaeological evidence (or lack thereof) for Jesus, and warns against archaeologists making unsustainable claims.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Jerusalem
• Robert
• Cargill
• UCLA
• archaeology
• Jesus
• evidence
• proof
• crucifixion
• Ginnosar
• Talpiot

[drfreebird777]

Are "evidence" and "proof" really the same? An argument for historicity is inductive: In other words, the more evidence, the more likely an historical claim is true. If there is enough evidence, people might in fact say a certain historical claim is PROVEN. Given this, while the "Jesus Boat" and the crucified ankle bone would not PROVE the existence of Jesus, they do lend credence to literary claims, and thus constitute evidence in an inductive sense--though not proof--do they not? Thanks.

[EdM021]

There is an ossuary found in a tomb of Cyrenaian Jews in the Kidron Vlley discovered in 1941. Most recent coin found in the tomb was dated to 42 CE. The ossuary in question had the inscription "Alexander Son of Simon" in Koine Greek on it. Does this prove that we have archaeological evidence for the Evangelists' Simon of Cyrene, father of Alexander and Rufus? No, it does not.

[interstellarwonder]

@drfreebird777 no

[razeone100]

this is just something i want to say, i don't understand how we can find dinosaur bones (which are older than Jesus' time) but no evidence of Jesus of Nazareth...