"At the time, the finding raised few alarms, as these had been common names at the time of Jesus."
How can the proponents of this theory get around that? All a DNA test will prove is that they found a tomb of people who were related - not a revolutionary find.
Yes, that's what I was thinking. Did Christ leave a DNA sample at CSI Cameron?
This is bullsh*t...pure and simple.
"How can the proponents of this theory get around that? All a DNA test will prove is that they found a tomb of people who were related - not a revolutionary find."
As posted elswhere:
I met Jesus. He cuts my lawn. His young mother, Maria, sells tortillas. His father, Jose, is a carpenter and put up crown molding for me. Jesus helped.
Maybe they're the holy family?! Alive TODAY!
(yeah, sarcasm)
Actually, they're saying that the DNA shows Joseph and Mary were not related, (though they may well have been cousins), and they seem confused about the distinction between Miriam (Mary) of Nazareth and Miriam (Mary) of Magdala.
Just because somebody may have come up with DNA evidence that one family are genetically related, (duh) and their ossuaries bore the names similar to those in Scripture, it is an even greater stretch to think these are the same persons' boies as those in Scripture.
As a parallel, imagine how many families of Arabs have sons named Mohammed buried in tombs throughout the mideast, with their descendents renaming their tombs after perceived holy names.
Had the researchers been veritable, they would have first hypothesized the evidence of Christ's resurrection was so astounding that other families in that era renamed their entire families after Christ's associations.
Great point.
If this was scientific, they would have proven that this was the correct Jesus.
Showing a genetic link between the bones is only going part of the way.