The Real Bloodline of Jesus

Poe.com ^ | December 17, 2007 | Richard Lawrence Poe

[Richard Poe]

by Richard Lawrence Poe Monday, December 17, 2007	Permanent Link Past Columns

AT CHRISTMASTIME, Nativity scenes help bring the family of Jesus to life. However, they present only a small portion of his family. Scripture informs us that Jesus grew up in a large, sprawling clan, with many relatives. What became of that clan? Some branches may have survived. It is possible that some people living today might be related to Jesus.

Dan Brown’s blockbuster novel The Da Vinci Code contends that Jesus wed Mary Magdalene and fathered a royal dynasty of France. The book sparked interest in Jesus’ bloodline. Unfortunately, Brown's wild speculations and burning hostility toward the Church tainted the subject with an odor of crankery.

The fictional bloodline of Jesus ballyhooed in Brown’s novel should not be confused with Jesus' real bloodline.

Ancient writings make clear that Jesus hailed from an old and honored family. The first sixteen verses of the Gospel of Matthew set forth a genealogy depicting Joseph, the father of Jesus, as the twenty-fourth great grandson of King David.

Early Christians plainly viewed Jesus as an heir of David, a legitimate claimant to the throne of Israel.

Of course, they also viewed Jesus as the son of God, not of Joseph. This complicates the picture, but an adopted prince is a prince nonetheless.

Mary, the mother of Jesus, also came from a prominent family. Luke 1:5 tells us that Mary’s cousin Elizabeth was a Levite, descended from a long line of Israelite priests.

Mary's parents Joachim and Anna (or Hannah) were a wealthy and pious couple favored by God, according to the Gospel of James. Though never included in the Bible, the Gospel of James has received respectful study from generations of Christian scholars.

Despite his illustrious pedigree, Jesus worked as a humble carpenter. This should not surprise us. In his day, the sons of Herod ruled Judea, serving as puppets of Rome. The House of David was out of power, out of favor, and, in Jesus' case, out of pocket as well.

The New Testament names other relatives of Jesus. "Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary, the wife of Cleophas...", states John 19:25.

It may seem odd that two sisters would share the same name, but these two Marys were probably cousins, not sisters.

Poor translation is to blame. The oldest known manuscripts of the New Testament are written in Greek. However, these Greek documents apparently drew on earlier sources composed in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke.

Neither Aramaic nor Hebrew has any word for cousin. In these ancient tongues, the only precise way to identify a cousin was to use a clumsy formula such as "the son of my uncle". Consequently, Hebrew and Aramaic scribes often referred to cousins and other relatives as "brother" or "sister".

For example, in Genesis 29:15, Laban calls Jacob, his nephew, "brother". Genesis 14:12-14 refers to Lot as the "brother" of his uncle Abraham.

Four men are called "brothers of the Lord" in the Gospels; James, Simon, Jude and Joseph. Mark 6:3 also mentions “sisters” of Jesus. These "brothers" and "sisters" were most likely cousins of Jesus.

Two of them -- James and Joseph -- are probably the sons of "Mary, wife of Cleophas" whose names appear in Matthew 27:56. This same Mary also had a daughter named Salome, according to Mark 15:40.

At least a dozen blood relatives of Jesus can be identified by name. Could any of these have living descendants today?

Written records provide only fragmentary clues. Other research methods are available, however.

One such approach was featured on a March 27, 2006 episode of the History Channel's archaeology series Digging for the Truth.

Former host Josh Bernstein put the Da Vinci Code to the test by comparing DNA from the bones of a French Merovingian queen with DNA from a community claiming kinship with ancient Galileans. Not surprisingly, the samples showed no match. However, Bernstein made a more important discovery.

He found that members of Jerusalem’s Syriac Orthodox Church claim descent from the family of Jesus. This ancient community still speaks and worships in Aramaic. Its origins are obscure.

“These families can be traced all the way back to Jesus Christ?”, Bernstein asked the church's Archbishop Severios Malki Murad.

“Of course”, he replied. “We are from the same family”.

Such claims may or may not withstand scientific scrutiny. But they are worth exploring.

By comparing oral history, DNA and whatever scraps of written records survive, we may yet succeed in locating the nearest living relatives of Jesus.

	Richard Lawrence Poe is a contributing editor to Newsmax, an award-winning journalist and a New York Times bestselling author. His latest book is The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Siezed Control of the Democratic Party, co-written with David Horowitz.

[PurpleMan]

Say “Happy Festivus!”

[MHGinTN]

Check out ‘Glastonbury’ for the New Testament times missionary work of Joseph and company. The ‘legends’ of Jesus taking his family to Europe to live out their lives is baloney, but there is solid evidence that Joseph—who had mining interests in Southwestern England, in Tin and Lead—did indeed go there at the behest of Philip, to establish the first above-ground Christian Church. Of course the Roman Catholic Church downplays this because it would mean the Romish claims are specious ot some extent.

[ReignOfError]

That has to be it. I’ve not thought about it for some time. And I googled that “cousin” is only used in the KJV; I’ve got 3 or 4 different translations and can’t work from them all from memory.

At the time of the KJV, the word cousin meant "kinsman," more or less -- someone who belongs to the same clan or extended family. That's how it's often used in Shakepeare, which was written at about the same time.

[Aliska]

Way back when I had only the KJV, no access to the internet and church fathers, when I first saw the "cousin", I thought "aha the Catholic church is wrong," (not that I was out to prove them wrong, just starting on my adult spiritual journey really, stumbled across that). But that was years ago; since I've had to broaden my horizons a bit on the relationship issues, all the rest of it and implications.

So, assuming you are correct, thanks for the clarification. I do like the KJV because it was the bible of my childhood and a few verses I memorized tend to flow in my mind in that wording, but I don't use that as my only reference any more. I think if we stubbornly cling to that only, it does not give us the entire picture and probably has a bias due to the translators.

[modican]

hair and teeth last the longest, plus people who were cremated, no DNA material left for the resurrection

The Question is Not!, what happens to us after "disassembly". The Question Is!: what have you left, that continues after you are disassembled. The Man Jesus is still remembered 2000 years later, I wonder what he was like in the year 0020.

[Aliska]

The Question is Not!, what happens to us after "disassembly". The Question Is!: what have you left, that continues after you are disassembled.

Probably so, we go wherever we go, what is left? Not much; most of us will not be remembered, will be lucky, wrong word, shouldn't matter, to have a grave marker with our earthly names 50, 100, 500 years from now what with the SC decision on eminent domain. That cemetery is prime real estate for the repidly growing population. Many San Francisco tombstones in some of the older cemeteries were used as rubble in building the Golden Gate Bridge. Being forgotten would not be such a bad thing; your memory will live on as long as retained by those who loved, journeyed with or despised you, and possibly retold to their descendants for a generation or two at least. Most of our works will end up in a landfill or quickly decay, works of plastic may last longer than the cathedrals. Who knows? I used to care, like immortality consisted in my leaving something as a personal reminder of my earthly existence. It doesn't seem to make a whole lot of difference one way or the other now. If I must be remembered, I would wish it would be for some ultimate good, even the negative things.

I don't think that is why we are here. But I believe there is a purpose for every life. That was a difficult comment to respond to, sorry if I botched it. The most important thing to me is the love and service that we could give especially to those outside the family circle and some whom the world would consider as losers.

[OldEagle]

"The father's DNA came from the same ethnic base as Joseph's, so I ask again, why not Joseph's?"

I realize you are trying to solve a riddle, but remember you are using human reasoning rather than divine truth. What makes you believe that Christ's DNA would follow the same rules as yours and mine? And since DNA is a relatively recent earthly discovery, what makes you think Christ would have had DNA as you know it?

[modican]

Many San Francisco tombstones

I like the way you write. You must be a "higher knowledge ex-hippy". I live in San Francisco, I will look up this cemetery.

[Charles Henrickson]

The first sixteen verses of the Gospel of Matthew set forth a genealogy depicting Joseph, the father of Jesus, as the twenty-fourth great grandson of King David. Early Christians plainly viewed Jesus as an heir of David, a legitimate claimant to the throne of Israel.

This month I've had a series of sermons on the genealogy of Jesus Christ:

"The Genealogy of Jesus Christ: From Abraham to David" (Sermon on Matthew 1:1-6a)

"The Genealogy of Jesus Christ: From David to the Deportation" (Sermon on Matthew 1:1, 6b-11)

"The Genealogy of Jesus Christ: From the Deportation to the Christ" (Sermon on Matthew 1:1, 12-17)

"You Shall Call His Name Jesus" (Sermon for the Fourth Sunday in Advent), on Matthew 1:18-25

[Uri’el-2012]

The first sixteen verses of the Gospel of Matthew set forth a genealogy depicting Joseph, the father of Jesus, as the twenty-fourth great grandson of King David.

Early Christians plainly viewed Jesus as an heir of David, a legitimate claimant to the throne of Israel.

Of course, they also viewed Jesus as the son of God, not of Joseph. This complicates the picture, but an adopted prince is a prince nonetheless.

There are four things that are important here:

1. Miriam is a daughter who has no brothers
and is descended from King David.

2. Joseph is descended from King David.
But he is from a line prohibited to inherit.

3. The inheritance exception granted for the daughters of Zelophehad
(These were daughters who had no brothers)
is in effect (Numbers 26,27,36; Joshua 17; 1 Chronicles 7 ).

4. Joseph and Miriam are married ( each descended from King David)
thus providing Miriam with permanent inheritance
of the Kingship of David for her to pass on to her son Yah'shua.

b'SHEM Yah'shua

[Aliska]

I like the way you write. You must be a "higher knowledge ex-hippy". I live in San Francisco, I will look up this cemetery.

Thanks, nothing special about me, don't have the Ann Coulter touch :-). She has a better vocab.

ex-hippy, funny you should bring that up, missed it by a decade. My daughter's been asking me a lot of questions about growing up in my time, born just before Pearl Harbor. Last night she asked what I thought about the hippies. Now I may be opening myself up to some flak, and we had covered a lot of ground, but here are my exact words on that, bear in mind I was tired:

"...what did you think of hippies?

"Not much. I was a new mom by that time, couldn't relate to that scene at all. Didn't hate them though, they were a bunch of spoiled, privileged kids like I was for the most part. They dragged the teen culture down, and it has never recovered. I told you we weren't angels, but most kids rich or poor had nicer manners then."

About the cemetery, think it was more than one, please let me know what you find out, best to not throw something out there without sourcing it. I think I read it on a gold rush group mailing list for rootsweb (genealogy); now I can't find that. I had a gr gr uncle who died in the gold rush and haven't been able to find the exact date or his final resting place, the only one I can't account for in that respect for many generations.

This isn't where I read it, but here is a good starting point, doesn't say anything specifically relating tombstones to any fill for the Golden Gate Bridge:

moving the dead

There is a lot of interest at the link, may go back to it when I have more time. My two daughters were born in northern CA while their father was in the military, and I've been to San Francisco several times, not in later years, enjoyed Lombard Street and Fisherman's Wharf to mention a couple of special places.

[modican]

The Hippie Legacy: A ghost we chase, people coming here from all over the world, 40 years later, but nothing is to see. pufff.

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are Blam, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·