Christ the Magician

[LoneMateria]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26972493/ns/technology_and_science-science/

So I was going through reddit and I saw this article linked.  Basically some archeologists supposedly uncovered a cup with an inscription on it saying, "Christ the magician" on it.  A few of the details of this article makes me think its a fraud though it doesn't change anything if it is or isn't.  First off when you look at the picture it looks (to me at least) like the inscription was recently put on it.  I have 2 reasons for saying that ... one is that the writing looks fresh, its significantly lighter then the cup itself which I wouldn't expect after more then 2000 years (I'll get back to this its the other reason I think its either a fake or bad information was given.)  And two if you notice most of the cup is chipped and has visible wear and tear on it however none of the writing  shows these blemishes.  Now my other reason for doubting its authenticity is because of the supposed date.  It says it occurred between 200bce and about 100ce.  I'm sorry to my knowledge radio carbon dating is a bit more accurate then this.  You don't get that big of a difference when you date back to the ancient greek times which should have a higher volume for error since its significantly further back.

Anyways what do you all think of this?  I think regardless Christians will consider this some verification or evidence that their religion correct and they will find a way to vindicate themselves regardless.  Also I think its hilarious the assumptions made in this article to try and tie it to the faith.  Like saying that Christ was a magician of "white magic" ... What like a white mage from Final Fantasy?  I never saw him casting Curaga (cure on many people at once for those who aren't as big of a loser as me).

[Whitney]

Even if it is not a fake....how do they know it refers to Jesus of the Bible?  From my understanding, there were lots of self proclaimed messiahs back then.  Not to mention that magic is condemned in the bible so no one would be celebrating Christ the Magician and it just seems weird that they would put that saying on a cup.

I agree that the engraving looks very new compared to the rest of the cup....almost as if the expedition team engraved it themselves....
There should be some discoloration in the groves of the text and there isn't.

[LoneMateria]

Very good point about how magic is condemned in the bible.  There is a ton of strange stuff about this article.  I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be a hoax.  Maybe these people wanted to sell that artifact for more money so they engraved that on the cup. Who knows.  However even if this is disproved (like the shroud of turan) many people will ignore it and say its a matter of faith and that it still furthers their belief in Jesus.  It's a lose lose fight on so many levels, but its just sad its over something as non-convincing.

[OldGit]

Seems to me that Jesus was a pretty good magician.  Conjuring up wine, food, walking on water etc.  He may well have sold souvenir mugs at his big shows; they'll probably also find coasters and pencils monogrammed with the chi-rho symbol.

[Squid]

I knew it....David Blaine CAN time travel...

[OldGit]

Maybe the archaeologist who transliterated the inscription is already distorting the truth to favour a christian interpretation.  The given transcription is CHRSTOU, but that ignores the very clear character between the rho and the sigma, which looks like an eta to me.  So in the old pronounciation we clearly read CHRESTOU, which is what this bloke Bert Smith reads, and not CHRISTOU.  The third letter of CHRISTOS is an iota.
So why did they put CHRSTOU at the top of the article?  Maybe just a typo, or did someone conveniently miss letter three because it doesn't do much good for the Christ theory?

[OldGit]

Since posting that, I've hunted high and low for this story.  There are dozens of articles which replicate the original error: 'CHRSTOU'.  Most also assume it must mean Christ.  Presumably they can't read Greek and follow the herd. Still, one or two commentators see through it, e.g.:

http://ralphriver.blogspot.com/2008/10/ ... crock.html

The bowl pretty clearly reads δια χρησÏ,,οu, "through Chrestos," not "Christ." Chrestos is a personal name, as well as an adjective meaning "decent" or "useful.

So the question is, has everyone blindly followed a genuine error, or did someone, at the start, miss out the fairly clear 'η' (eta) which they knew would have ruled Jesus right out of it?  To my mind, the academically honest transcription would have been "CHR?STOU, almost certainly CHRESTOU and certainly not CHRISTOU"

[LoneMateria]

Nice link.  This whole thing does seem botched doesn't it?

[OldGit]

Yup.  So this whole story was widely replicated throughout the world's media, claiming an early link with Jebus, and the whole thing was based on an elementary misreading which may or may not have been rank dishonesty.  Very few commentators checked it out.
It's precisely as you said at the start:

I think regardless Christians will consider this some verification or evidence that their religion correct and they will find a way to vindicate themselves regardless.

This is not very important but so typical of stories claiming to support religion; that's why I took the trouble to look into it.
Incidentally I exchanged PMs with a native Greek speaker who reads it precisely as I do.