>If the DNA doesn't connect to Jesus, then all they've 'proved' is that two people who they postulate were Jesus and Mary (their translationsof the ossuaries, not everyone's) had a child. Also, if not brother and sister, then why necessarily 'husband and wife'? Because they had a child? > >If the resurrection is true, then there would be no bones belonging to Jesus to find, regardless where it may have happened. No? After resurrection he ascended, didn't he? Maybe I have it wrong, but I think, according to the gospels, he'd have ultimately left no body parts behind.
Bingo.
I think on the bottom they found an inscription in latin (written by Asterix) "I thee wed..."
"Once again, we come to the Holiday Season, a deeply religious time that each of us observes, in his own way, by going to the mall of his choice." -- Dave Barry
