GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-01 > 1169585854


From: John Cartmell <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Da Vinci Code DNA study
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:57:34 +0000 (GMT)
References: <4ea9c6aeedjohn@cartmell.demon.co.uk><812389.23672.qm@web59203.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <812389.23672.qm@web59203.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


On 23 Jan, Cheryl Simani <> wrote:

> John Cartmell <> wrote: On 23 Jan, Cheryl
> Simani wrote:
> > Actually, from the Jewish perspective the Meshiach is to marry and have
> > children, as well as, be born by natural means. The word almah used in
> > Isaiah means a young woman. The word for virgin is b'tulah. But, probably
> > the Meshiach would have made a better choice for the mother of his
> > children than Mary Magdeline.

> What choice might be better? Note that none of the pejorative descriptions
> can be regarded as valid and the internal evidence of the Gospels suggests
> an appropriate consort.

> John, Few royal households would be thrilled to have a woman who had been
> "married five times" previously, as stated in this thread, or who was by
> other accounts a prostitute, as the mother of the heir-apparent. It's
> just not good breeding - not to mention the emotional baggage that comes
> from a life-style. But after all, this part of the story is fantasy.

Some bits even more fantastical than others! Baseless assumptions added
centuries later would be no impairment. ;-)

> On the topic of DNA, the line of King David should be a J1 branch that
> had separated from the CMH roughly 3000 years BP.

How much reliance is placed on the CMH now that many more markers are
available?

--
John


This thread: