Here we go...Weeeee!

[Kestrel]

Feb. 25, 2007 â€" New scientific evidence, including DNA analysis conducted at one of the world's foremost molecular genetics laboratories, as well as studies by leading scholars, suggests a 2,000-year-old Jerusalem tomb could have once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth and his family.

SOURCE

This'll start everyone on a whole new path of debate postures.

I found the following disclaimer interesting;
Resurrection: It is a matter of Christian faith that Jesus of Nazareth was resurrected from the dead three days after his crucifixion circa 30 C.E. This is a central tenet of Christian theology, repeated in all four Gospels. The Lost Tomb of Jesus does not challenge this belief....

MORE DISCLAIMER

(I wrestled whether this should go in Science or Religion. Science obviously won.)

[Whitney]

Um...so what?  I personally think that it's possible that Jesus existed; just that it's not probable that all the miraculous things associated with him occured (and even if they did we really couldn't know for sure...it would be a lot  more probable if we could all personally experience obvious miracles).

Anyway, the article also says that Jesus possibly had a son...you'd think that would be mentioned in the Bible if it were true (yes, I know it has been proposed by others before...the point is that if the bible is true it wouldn't leave out something so important; like him getting married; if he wasn't married then he was a sinner and therefore not all holy and not a pure sacrifice)

[McQ]

Well, at least the most important archaeological and religious find in human history will be unveiled first on TV, instead of being first reviewed in some stodgy, peer reviewed journal. I wonder if they'll get Geraldo to help?

Ummmm....also, who's DNA are they comparing? And to whom else?

[liketolearn]

i don't know if this should be under 'science'... i've heard a lot of really crappy stuff about the quality of this find

[McQ]

Not surprisingly, this is essentially a "Lose-lose" scenario for all christians.

If there was a way to match what DNA may be found in the remains in the tomb to someone, they don't even know who to match it to, except the other remains in the tomb. But the likelihood that the tomb is genuinely the one the producers of the show think it is, is remote at best.

If they do even match any DNA up, and make the ridiculous leap of logic that one set belongs to a guy named Jesus, then which Jesus are they talking about? The one who was resurrected and didn't leave a body behind, or some other guy? There's no way for christians to come out ahead in this.

It's frustratingly stupid, and the only ones who profit are egomaniac James Cameron and the backers of the show.

It's a total crock of shit.

[Squid]

So, doesn't a tomb with a dead Jesus fuck up the whole Jesus-ascent to heaven thing?  I mean, isn't a dead Jesus a deal breaker?  

The part of the disclaimer about sightings after his supposed death as support of ressurection - hell, people see Elvis all over the place all the time.

However, I'd wait for more professional scholarly analysis of the tombs, carvings, dating of material and so forth before jumping to any conclusion.

[Will]

Will the tomb include photo evidence of walking on water or maybe some water turned into wine?