I waited all week with anticipation of the Discovery Channel show last night regarding the potential find of The Lost Tomb of Jesus...I have been reviewing the possible implications in my mind during the week. What would it mean for my faith if they found the bones of Jesus? There is controversy over whether he physically ascended or just his spirit ascended. My personal opinion is that the ascension of Jesus was a physical one, after all, it does say in the New Testament that the disciples could touch him. So when he returned he was in human form. However,
Lost Tomb of Jesus? Where's the DNA?
http://www.melissaomarkham.com/2007/03/lost_tomb_of_jesus_wheres_the.html
I can also see the potential argument that if only his spiritual self ascended, his followers would hide his bones because there would be those who would then doubt the story of Jesus. And the more important part of the story is that after three days he rose from the dead. And he was seen by many after his resurrection and before his ascension.
As I stated before I have no problem believing Jesus was married and had a child, though I do wonder if the ossuary in the Talpiot tomb was for a child was he the only child? And if he was, then Jesus' line ended with him.
So, I watched the documentary last night. My mind as open as I could make it. The statistician made a very compelling argument when he discussed the statistical probability of finding another family with all of those names in it from that time frame. In other words, there are lots of Brittany's running around the world today, but how many of them have moms and siblings with the same name as Brittany Spears (if she even has siblings, I am afraid, my Brittany education is about nil). So when I saw the statistics I was impressed and I also note that that information filled up the better part of the first hour, as it was indeed their strongest point.
Then they went on to the DNA and we were led through many shots of the scientists who were 'blindly' studying these samples of Jesus and Mary Magdalene (I assume they really didn't know whose DNA they were looking at, but they must have known something big was up...how often do filmmakers want to film you going about your work?) I accept that the fact that these DNA's weren't related would imply marriage between the two. But the big whole here that I can't fathom is why didn't they test the other DNA!?????!!!! I mean, it can't have been a matter of money, because for a find like that, people would mortgage their first born to obtain that data. Why not see if DNA from the James and Jose ossuaries matched Jesus. And better yet...how about Mary Magdalene, Jesus and Judah...come on...let's get facts here, people! If they had come back and said that the DNA indicated that James, Jose, and Jesus were related and that Judah was related to Mary and Joseph...now that would have been something. But strangely, this information is lacking. Perhaps, there wasn't enough material to do this testing with, but if so, it seems like they would have mentioned that. Or perhaps, they did the tests and came up with nada and were hoping no one would notice. Whatever is going on, I would very much like to know the answer.
Then there was the patina...stuffed in at the end and fastly gone through. I felt like I was back in school again looking at flash cards. Those graphs popped up so quickly, I was unable to ascertain if the minerals did match up. It did notice that the spikes were not exactly the same on a couple of them (even though they were in the same spot, they weren't as high). I wouldn't have paid much attention, but then, I noticed on some of the random samples they tossed up that it was the same. I would like to see these samples more closely and slowly so I could study them
So, bottom line for me is that they didn't give me enough information and it was information that, presumably, they could have easily provided. Are they going for the sequel ratings? Or is the real truth that there isn't a story here, that the other information is in and was unsupportive, so they conveniently left it out, hoping that no one would notice? Honestly, I mentioned it to a friend and she, a smart gal, said, 'well, I just assumed that they were unable to get to those samples because they were ordered to reseal the tomb.' I reminded her that the ossuaries weren't in the tomb so that shouldn't have been an issue. If she missed that, how many others did as well?
So in the paraphrased words of Cuba Gooding..."Show me the DNA!" Then we can have more discussion.