JNJ:

All of these are answered in the posts. 1) The plain tomb is hard to explain for someone the family honored and revered. More than that the inscription is so sloppy that it also is unlikely fro someone the family honored. 2) You are correct that to smuggle this Jesus tomb in is very unlikely (and it woudl have to be moved from Joseph of Arimathea's tomb. 3) Jesus inscription is not tied to anyone in the name. The name stands alone. So it is correct that the link could be with anyone else in the tomb. 4) The presence of Matthew is a problem. Why is he there? Also why are not Jesus' other brothers there? 5) The cluster of names and statistics have been covered multiple times. The problem is figuring out exactly how to figure this and be fair to the data. This is why verious models for this topic have been posed. Does one count names from ossuaries lists or names from inscriptions and ossuaries (to enlarge the name base in the record we have). How does one account for the fact we only have a part of the name pool that existed. What population figure for Judea and Galilee should be included? This is what makes figuring the statistics difficult. There is NO REASON historically to link the mariamne inscription to Mary Magdalene. The "link" is very problematic,as there is no early evidence connecting this person to the name on the inscription. So JNJ hre are many of the answers.