Ididn't catch the whole show. I found it very interesting. I would like to know if DNA testing was done on all ossuaries? Why did they just pick the two to test. If you are going to suggest that Jesus, Mary M. had a son why wouldn't you test the three and see if the child matches? I don't feel having containers with names on them conclusive. It would build a stronger case to have DNA testing on all ossuaries.
achtioc: Guess what - the other ossuaries were empty! Big surprise. They allegedly removed all the contents of the others to give them a proper burial. I guess they didn't think that Jesus and Mary Magdalene needed a proper burial. If the Church even suspected this might really be the remains of Jesus Christ, I'm certain the Catholic church would have demanded that His remains be taken to St. Peter's where they belong. The reason they picked those two? I suspect strongly that it was because those two could be linked in marriage - something the gnostics have been trying to do for centuries - turn Jesus into just another preacher with a family he abandons when he chooses death on a cross as expiation for our sinfulness. Isn't it sad that he died for such as those who defame him even now? Then again, I'd prefer to think of how grateful I am that He rose above death and promises us eternal life.
MY QUESTION IS, WHY DID THEY NOT TAKE DNA FROM MARY (MOTHER OF JESUS) AND DNA FROM JESUS (SON OF JOSEPH) AND COMPARE THEM? IF THIS WAS JESUS, THEN THE DNA WOULD PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT THE BONES FOUND IN THE LITTLE BOX WAS JESUS. MARY WAS A VIRGIN AND CONCEIVED THROUGH GOD. HE WOULD ONLY HAVE HIS MOTHER`S DNA. RIGHT? HE WOULD NOT HAVE HIS FATHER`S DNA. THE STORY OF MARY AND JOSEPH. JOSEPH TOOK THE VIRGIN MARY THAT WAS ALREADY WITH CHILD. THIS CHILD WAS NOT JOSEPH`S. SO THAT MEANS, NO DNA FROM JOSEPH WOULD BE FOUND, ONLY MARY`S WOULD BE THERE. NOW , ONCE THAT IS PROVEN. THEY CAN THEN TEST THE DNA FROM JUDA AND MARY (MAGDALENE) TO SEE IF THE CHILD WAS THEIRS. I DO NOT KNOW WHY THEY DID NOT DO ALL THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. ONE MORE QUESTION. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TESTS WERE DONE AND WHAT THE RESULTS WERE FROM THE SHROUD OF TURIN? ANY COMMENTS OR INFORMATION IS APPRECIATED.
I think they only had Bone fragments from MM and Jesus. The other boxes were vaccumed out. If they can find DNA through swabs than I would agree those would be some interesting tests.
THANKS! I AGREE AS WELL. THE BONES WHERE VACCUMED OUT? I DID NOT HEAR THAT PART. DO THEY STILL HAVE THE BONES SOMEWHERE? MAYBE THEY WILL DO A SECOND PART TO THIS STORY AND LET US KNOW. I THINK IF THEY WANT THE PUBLIC TO BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE FOUND THE TOMB OF JESUS, THEY BETTER COME UP WITH SOME PRETTY HARD DNA EVIDENCE. THE WAY THINGS ARE LOOKING, IT ALL SEEMS TO BE A HYPED UP STORY TO GET VIEWERS. THAT`S MY OPINION. THANKS.
It was definitely an eye opener this show; specially for experts. Regarding the DNA, if they could do testing between Mary and Jesus that will only prove a family relation between the to samplers; however that will not prove that is in fact Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary but it will be a strong fact to have. The DNA test will only prove if in fact there was relationship or not between all ossuaries. What it really interests me and what I think they were trying to show in this documentary; was the actual probabilities of having all those important names under one tomb. I really believe that is very unlikely to find another tomb with all 5 names with the exact combination of “Jesus son of Joseph”, “Mary”, etc… and what borders me why it wasn’t taken which much higher consideration when it was first discovered back 1980’s or something.
What it would be interested is to much that DNA’s found in “Jesus son of Joseph” with the nail used in Jesus’ crucifixion which I don’t recall where they have and if it is possibility to get a DNA sample from there.
Maybe they did the other DNA tests and the results are being kept quiet. They did show that they took samples from every ossuary. I'm wondering why the Israeli gov't stepped in and stopped the process. I believe I caught a few attempts at CYA by the officials. I can't believe that they buried the remains on a hillside without any markings. Why not embrace the findings? Isn't everything about the truth? Instead of pointing fingers at each other, work together to find the answers. I think if this is truly the family tomb then a lot of the blanks can be filled in between different accounts of thier lives.
During the program, when the two samples were tested for DNA extraction, the processed used was explained. The lab doing the testing had no idea who they were testing (other than the fact that it was ancient bone fragments of a man and a woman). During the process description, it was noted that, once found, the DNA was "cloned" in order to ensure a repetive comparison. Even though only a "partial DNA" was uncovered, the use of the word "cloned" made the hair rise on the back of my neck. Maybe I just think too much.
I have written a blog article on this very question regarding why wasn't more DNA testing done. I didn't hear anything in the Documentary last night that there wasn't enough material in the other ossuaries to test out. That would go a long way to helping answer some questions and to proving that they are indeed onto something. I would assume Jesus did have DNA as he was a man, now, maybe it is only the DNA of Mary...wouldn't that be fascinating if they did DNA on the Mary and Jesus ossuaries and found they were identical....
If you want to read my thoughts, they are at www.melissaomarkham.com.
THANKS FOR THE REPLY. WHEN THEY SAID CLONED, WHAT EXACTLY DOES THAT MEAN? DOES IT MEAN THAT THEY HAD TO ADD TO THE DNA SAMPLE TO GET A RESULT? INTERESTING???? HMMMMMM? WHAT ARE THE COMPONATES OF DNA? I MEAN, I KNOW THEY TEST TO SEE WHO A CHILD BELONGS TO AND USED TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND ALL. IN MATTHEW 1:18-25 IT EXPLAINS IT ALL. JESUS WOULD ONLY CARRY MARY`S DNA. THE HOLY GHOST DOES NOT HAVE DNA. KNOW WHAT I MEAN?ANY INFO WOULD BE GREAT! THANKS!!!
Hi, sorry to intrude on the conversation but I just really liked what you were talking about. My question is that how do we know that Jesus has DNA that is recognizable, or can Jesus even have children because He is God in the flesh. So I'm not so sure that He could have children and I hope that they are able to run tests on Mary and Him so that everything will be decided. I know that the Bible prepares us for blasphemous tales such as that but I also know that the truth will come out. Please, tell me if I'm way out of line with this.
Hello Everyone, It is extremely ironic that only DNA could only be taken from two tombs. Its interesting that all the others were vaccumed out and maybe that happened for a reason??? Its going to be exciting to hear more evidence and hopefully more research on this topic.
Well, even as a child I wondered if He could have children, because how could someone so perfect have relations with someone so imperfect? Meaning, how would the children be? Would they spiritually unchased or what? That's what I meant by that. And with the DNA, how would it show up? Would there be His mothers and then nothing?
nothing is about the truth. I also noticed that it seemed like the officials of the area didnt want anything to be done about this new information. Obviously, to the religious community, this is probably something that they do not want to be pursued. It raises to many questions about the christian faith. Was Jesus married? Did he have a child? Was his body resurrected to heaven, or just his spirit? These are all questions I would like to see pursued, but that's just me. Organized religion is another monster all together. Let us not forget that people, many many people, throughout history have been killed because of religious beliefs. And not all of the killing was justified, so this is not the first time ideas and information has been suppressed, or beaten down by critics. I'm sure there will be more studies on this, but it will not be easy for those doing it. That has already been shown in the film.
Why not? What if he did fall in love, did get married, did want children? Did have sex would you look at Jesus any differently? I sure wouldn't. I find it refreshing that just maybe he is more similar to us...
Tiff: I don't think it's a question of whether or not Jesus could have children or even if he might be too chaste to want to. It appears from the gospel accounts that he was totally devoted to his work. From the way the gospels potray him, he seemed to be a workaholic who had "nowhere to lay his head." He travelled extensively for one thing and that doesn't make for a good family man. He suggested that his disciples leave their families, homes, jobs to follow him. I find it hard to believe that if he'd ask that of them, he wouldn't set the example for them. Scripture indicates that he was totally committed to his mission. "No man can serve two masters..." As for that DNA testing, it gets curioser and curioser by the minute. Now they're saying there wasn't anything left in the other ossuaries to use for the tests. As I recall more than a few of those ossuaries contained skulls. Surely they couldn't have extracted DNA from those skulls. I think they believe that we are all so gullible that we're going to buy their hype with the same enthusiasm as some people read and believe the tabloid trash. This certainly appeared to be nothing more than a sensationalized tabloid version of the story of Jesus as related by a camera-less papparazzi mob.
I would like to know if there is a cemetary, forget about a "family" tomb, that has all those names; Jesus son of Joseph, Maria, James brother of Jesus, Matti,and Mariamne writin exactly like that. I highly doubt it. There is only a 1 in 600 chance that it is NOT Jesus. If this was anything else there wouldn't be one person who would disagree. 1 in 600,the writing is literally on the coffin. The tomb also is around 2000 years old.hmmm
I see where you're coming from and a former Pastor of mine had said the same thing about Him being dedicated to doing God's Will. Yet what bugged me the most was that they wouldn't tell you that. They looked "realistically" at the NT and never once did they show you where in the Bible it said this, they did tell you the book but not verse by verse to prove their story plausible. They also didn't have anyone show opinions like the one you just presented to me. So that tells me, as a viewer, that they are unable to back up their findings with undeniable truth, there's just a tomb with a bunch of peoples names on it and two DNA samples that are not related.
Kansu, that is true but how do we know that all of that is accurate? Yes the tomb is probably 2000 yrs old and that those names could very well be the true names of the bones in the coffins. But we can never really know if it's true because we do not have on hand the spear that cut Jesus' side so that we can compare it to the coffin nor do we have DNA that can link anyone other than the two in the coffin. Everything is hearsay
Jen, I wouldn't look at him any differently because it's okay to have sex inside of marriage but what I was saying is that what would become of a perfect person having sex with someone not so perfect...what would become of His children.
saustin: I believe that the reason organized religion hasn't lent its support to these flimsy discoveries is that they don't wish to be any further embarrassed by them. The only questions I see that should be raised is to the veracity of the findings and the proof positive that the Jesus and Mary in question were in FACT those people in the Gospels. There is some pretty specious logic and downright perversion of the facts. This "study" wasn't founded in any scientific discipline associated with serious arhaeological finds of such import. If this indeed were the tomb of Jesus, the impact would be far greater than that of Tut's tomb's discovery. We're talking the Savior of the World here - not some kid that only reigned for a very short time. Yet, there has been more scientific study on Tut's mummy than there has been on the remains in Jesus' alleged ossuary. As for any reputed "marriage," Scripture doesn't support such an allegation. The NT writers were in much closer proximity to the actual events and people of the time of Jesus. The community was a small enough one that such "gossip" would have found it's way into the Bible or texts that were ommitted from the final versions. Even the gnostic texts do not confirm any marriage or children. Surely they would have made it their business to find such evidence much earlier and would have had access to that tomb centuries ago, if indeed it was in existence then. No carbon dating has been done on the ages of the ossuaries or for that matter of the tomb. The lack of substantive evidence is lacking big-time.
If they wanted statistical proofs, they had the Roman cenus taken during the time of Jesus. Why not use that for their statistics? They should have included ALL of the inhabitants of the time, not just a few with the same names. Just this morning someone named Magdalena sent me an email. Should I draw the conclusion that she was related to Mary Magdalene because she had the same name? What are the chances of winning big lotteries? Many people become instant millionaires - against the odds. In fact, one couple recently won TWO lotteries at the same time. Wonder what the statisticians would make of that? One cannot found proofs that beg to be proven archaeologically and scientifically by using statistics. Why not just carbon date the contents for their real age? Why not compare all of the DNA in ALL of the ossuaries with that of Mariasme and Jesus? They claim they don't have any remains in the other ossuaries to use for DNA. I saw several of those ossuaries bearing human skulls - they provide DNA. Someone isn't being honest or sincere herein and it isn't the Christian religion or Jesus Christ. Consider the source!
Thank you! I believe the only reason they are NOT testing the skulls or carbon dating or any other type of testing is because they are afraid that their story will be proved WRONG! All their theories will be proved null and void therefore they would have wasted money and time on something that was the exact opposite of what they were looking to find. I am from North Carolina and if this story comes out to be false then I have half a mind to go down to Charlotte and pay that professor a visit.
As to the sexuality of the union of a holy man with a woman of ill repute: The Catholic Church does not condone sex outside of marriage. Apparently, from what the story of the woman taken in adultery tells us about Jesus' reaction to her, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." He goes on to say, "Woman has no man accused you? Then I don't accuse you either. Go and sin no more." Since Jesus was a "man like us in everything but sin" one has to conclude that He didn't ask her to sleep with him - he told her to go and sin no more. That ought to give you some clue about his thoughts on the subject of sex.
Her name is Mariamne, Magdalena is where she is from. Maybe somebody from Magdalena e-mailed you. You are right, the source probably isn't Christian, you think a Christain wants
