I am curious about the extent of the scrapings as I'm guessing they might need a lot to get enough DNA from a 2000 year old coffin and in the original article it does refer to "human remains' Given that DNA decays I have a hard time buying that this is a mostly empty coffin and they are getting dandruff residue to analyze the DNA. That said I don't see why even if there is a body Jesus couldn't have risen from this tomb. We're dealing with spiritual issues here and as the saying goes God works in mysterious ways.
the footage i saw on the Today Show showed them scraping stuff off the sides. the "archaeologist" talked about it. i'm sure we'll learn more about it on Sunday night.
i love this! Jay Bakker's church's logo includes the phrase, "Destroying Religion Since 1994." (or something like that)
I'm not an expert in recovering DNA so I'm speculating here. Further the original article states that two sets of samples were taken. I'm not clear why the patina on the limestone boxes would contain enough DNA evidence to do the testing and I'm wondering if the patina was taken for another purpose like carbon dating. It sounds like on the Today show they were showing them collecting the patina and the wording of the article would indicate that is something separate from the human remains. As for the bits of matter its not clear what those are if there bones or possibly even desicated flesh.
What happens is that human decay begins to create a layer on the surface substrate of the stone. A mini-environment would be created within a stone tomb and thus whoever was buried there, even after complete decomposition, can "become one" with the stone...depending on climate, etc.. I will watch but I am not expecting too much coming from a Discovery TV show.
Very interesting.. If biological material was being incorporated into the stone substrate though how would that affect the DNA?
Well since the surface substrate is pourous I would guess there would be deep enough "pits" from which enough of a sample could be extracted. I know nothing about DNA sampling, though, I only know about sampling for electron microscopy.
Nice timing. And I really don't care either way what they find. It could very well be where he was buried... remember it was a "borrowed tomb" from Joseph of Arimathaea... So what's to say that this Joseph (and not the adopted father of Jesus) did not hook up with Mary Magdalene after Jesus Christ's resurrection/ascension etc... have a kid or two with Mary, name one of his sons Jesus? Has no one thought of this scenario? And it could still fit the whole "why couldn't he have risen from THIS tomb?" arguement. The fact is, Jesus the Christ (the anointed one, Son of God) very well could have... and yet another Jesus could have been buried there. Very plausible.
If this, or The DaVinci Code fpr that matter, is enough to shake you faith in God then you need to seriously reexamine your beliefs. I'm Christian but none of this is enough to shake my faith. Yes Jesus was the son of God, but he was also a man so its very plausible that he married, had kids, and was buried like a man. It may not be addressed in the Bible but to me its not relevant to his purpose here so I can see why it wouldn't be in there.
I'm not a Christian but I agree. I've always said science and religion while overlapping are about very different things and its a mistake to apply the method of one to prove the other. From my own spiritual standpoint this situation would be if archeologists proved that there never was a Prince Siddartha who spent three days meditating under a bodhi tree. Whether it can be physically proven that Siddartha existed or did what has Buddhism has attributed to him doesn't matter as much as the teachings.
The Da Vinci Code claims he and MM had a daughter and now this report is claiming he had a son? Interesting. I don't believe any of this but it's funny listening to people trying to poke holes in our beliefs.
