Considering that we don't have any of Jesus' DNA on file, how is DNA used to suggest that this might have been the tomb of Jesus and his family?
-Not asking in a indignant way, just in a curious way-
2007-02-27 16:52:27 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The DNA evidence is being overblown by BOTH sides, and both sides are overblowing the interpretation.
The DNA evidence says this:
Of the people in the tomb, the following relationships are validated -- Mary was mother of Jesus, Joseph was father of Jesus. Maryamne is not genetically related to Mary, Joseph or Jesus. Matthew is related to Mary somehow, but the relationship is unknown. Jesus and Maryamne are the parents of Judah.
There's no assertion in the DNA evidence that this Jesus is the Jesus of the Bible, or that any of these people are Biblical figures. That's where the overblowing comse into play.
2007-02-27 16:59:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
The DNA evidence doesn't suggest that. The only "evidence" from which they have decided this is the tomb of Jesus and His family are the names engraved on the ossuaries - all common names of people of the time period. The DNA simply shows that two of the people, a man and a woman, were not related by blood - from which they make the leap of faith that this must be Jesus and His wife!
The whole DNA thing is bogus. They didn't get any DNA from the actual bones. They got it by swabbing the inner surface of the ossuary - an object that has been handled and examined by dozens of people since it was excavated 20 years ago. Undoubtedly the DNA they analysed belonged to a couple of these people, either an archaeologist, a museum worker, or someone else involved. If this was forensic work they wouldn's have enough "evidence" to go to court. To even introduce the DNA as evidence they would first have to get samples from every person who has had access to the ossuaries since they were exhumed, so they could rule them out as sources of the DNA. Otherwise it is all just wild speculation. All it would take to contaminate such an object would be a speck of saliva or perspiration, or a flake of dandruff. the whole thing is totally bogus and is simply an attempt to capitalize on an essentially meaningless archeological find.
.
2007-02-27 17:28:01 · answer #2 · answered by barbara m 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is obviously useless. First, because Jesus's family was poor, and thus would not be able to afford a family tomb. Second those were very common names at the time, so it could be pretty much anyone. Third they found a body, so it can't be Jesus, or else the whole christianity thing would have died the day it began. All the DNA can show is how or how not the people in the tomb were related to eachother, no more, no less. Now wheres the next cheese sandwich with mary's face for us to go gaga over.
2007-02-27 17:13:42 · answer #3 · answered by acaykath 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
According to the news articles - its NOT proving he was Jesus for the obvious reason that no one has part of his DNA to compare to.
What it IS doing is proving that the resident of that ossuary was not related to the Mary ossuary. And if they weren't siblings, then they were probably married because only families were buried togethor.
And that's the whole deal about the DNA thing.
BTW, mitochondrial DNA is much more resistant to sticking around many hundreds of years afterward than the typical DNA in a cell's nucleus.
2007-02-27 17:03:21 · answer #4 · answered by special-chemical-x 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So many questions, but I still believe that Jesus was Jesus. The bible said he was crucified and put in a rich persons tomb, not the family tomb(?) and he rose to be with his father in Heaven after 3 days.
2007-02-27 16:59:24 · answer #5 · answered by Terry Z 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is what happened.
The scientists were able to extract DNA from two of the caskets (the ones of 'Jesus' and 'Mary').Doing tests,they found that the two in those caskets were not maternally related.That's it.
This is their supposedly 'groundbreaking' DNA evidence.
And you are exactly right.They cannot say it is Jesus,as they do not have a sample of Jesus' DNA to compare it to.
2007-02-27 16:58:30 · answer #6 · answered by Serena 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they only took dna from the bones in the Jesus tomb and from the tomb They think is Mary magdaline's to see if they were related. they were not. they did not even try to check the others. this is the athiest last ditch effort to end Christianity. not a drop of it proves Jesus is in that tomb. remember Jesus rose from the grave three days after death. so he is not dead.
2007-02-27 17:17:05 · answer #7 · answered by Thumbs down me now 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
There is no DNA ..this is just another step toward attacking Christ
and promoting a godless age in preparation for the Intrepid Dark
Son of perdition to come.. they said he didnt exist when that debate fell through,then they said he was gay and when that fell through they said he was secretly married..now their saying theyve got his dna...use your mind and know they have an agenda,if this dont stick there will be something else just as silly..
2007-02-27 17:03:45 · answer #8 · answered by Will Stone 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
We can't prove anything... Jesus don't have any remains here on earth because of the fact that he was raised from the dead... so that means they will NEVER EVER gonna prove it's Jesus bones.. They are just doing this maybe to do another "the DaVinci Code" they just want to make money out of this...
2007-02-27 16:57:26 · answer #9 · answered by [][][][][][][][][] 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Exactly....no way to do DNA. It is just drama to hype up the movie. The director admitted it isn't real.
2007-02-27 16:55:14 · answer #10 · answered by Jennifer L 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋