A couple of “historians” — Leon University medieval history lecturer Margarita Torres and art historian Jose Manuel Ortega del Rio –who have apparently been reading far too much Dan Brown, say they have found the Holy Grail. In their book “Kings of the Grail”, published last week, they identified a goblet at a church in Leon as the one Jesus Christ drank from at the Last Supper.
Jeeeeezus
I see several flaws with their story.
First, it’s not a dead sure certain thing that Jesus was a real person. We accept it because there are some historical accounts of preachers who had that name at around that time, but historians of the 1st century were probably, if you can believe it, even more truth challenged than historians today. Another reason most of us accept it as a historical fact is because we’re tired of arguing with Christians about it. Seriously, it gets to be tiresome, arguing with Christians. Or dogmatic people of any stripe, really, but we’re talking about Christians now. We also tend to accept it because it’s not really important. “O.K.,” I feel comfortable saying as an atheist. “He was a real person. There was a man called Jesus of Nazareth who the Romans killed in a particular gruesome way, which was the standard punishment at that time. That doesn’t mean his mother was a virgin when he was born, or that he rose from the dead, or that he was any more the son of God than anybody else. Or, in fact, that God exists.”
Second, they have no solid evidence that the goblet comes from the Middle East at all. It was a gift to the local warlord (Oh, very well…king) from some Moor, approximately a thousand years after Christ, in the era when Moorish soldiers were picking up knick knacks like that all over the known universe. Unless there was a bill of sale, indicating all owners for the previous millennium, they’ve got nothing.
Third, even if they could prove the goblet came from somewhere around Jerusalem, at some time around 30 a.d., that doesn’t mean it was his. He wasn’t the only person in the area who drank wine and owned a cup. Was there DNA evidence? Some sacred saliva? Was there a fingerprint of Jesus? How would anybody know? There are no fingerprints or DNA samples to test it against. We have no idea what Jesus looked like. If he were to appear on the streets of Manhattan today, he would probably be arrested.
Fourth, if it was Jesus’ cup, it was a bit gaudy, wasn’t it? Gold, with onyx, amethyst, and all sorts or weird precious gems inlaid. I’m no Christian, but it was my impression Jesus wasn’t really into stuff like that. Of course, it would fit in well with the modern, materialist Jesus, but it doesn’t smack of historical realism.
Fifth, as I mentioned before, it doesn’t really matter. If that was the cup Jesus’ drank from at the last supper, O.K. I guess it’s like finding the guitar Elvis played in High School, but for Christians. It neither enhances nor contradicts claims about his divinity.
Nonetheless, Christians are excited about it. They are flocking to the church in droves.
www.gurukalehuru.com 