February 26, 2007


Apparently James Cameron has announced that he found Jesus' burial site. Can someone please explain to me how DNA evidence would be any use in proving that it's "the" Jesus? What on earth are they comparing it to?

Posted by Sarah at February 26, 2007 08:11 AM | TrackBack

I read another article on the same subject, and what I find most depressing about the whole thing is the quality of the comments on both sides of the issue.

Far too few people are asking the obvious question - the one you asked. And far too many are taking this as proven already - whether they agree with it or not. Almost every comment falls into one of 2 categories - "Ah, finally, we can tell the Christians to shut up." or "All you unbelievers are going to Hell!"

It seems to me that the best Cameron can manage to prove is that he found a bunch of skeletons of dead Jewish people that are all related to each other. And they had names mentioned in the Bible (although he'll have a harder time proving that those weren't faked/misinterpreted/added later to make the family seem more important than it was...)

But unless he has a bona fide Jesus DNA sample somewhere to compare it to, there's really no way he can link his findings to the Jesus of the Bible.

Posted by: karishma at February 26, 2007 03:04 PM

As a person who has done a lot of genealogical research, the thing I found most disturbing about this is also what I found ridiculous about the DaVinci code. The idea that you could actually trace a family through periods of history when nothing was written about them, no legal or church sources is so laughable, and crazy. When research first started showing up on Family tree maker CD's, one for my husband's family showed purported records going back to Gog and Magog. Some people are really gullible.

Posted by: Ruth H at February 26, 2007 07:13 PM