valkyrie
The same observations would apply to Jesus, although we'll never know if he really had children. But let's assume that he did, and that he also had a lower than average number of descendants — say 500 in the year AD 250. Where would they have lived? Those centuries were a time of great ferment in the Roman Empire. Although most of Jesus' descendants probably would have lived in the Middle East, at least a few would have moved as far away as modern-day Italy and central Asia (whether as soldiers, traders or slaves).
Many of these individuals also would have had 500 to 1,000 descendants 250 years later. And these tens of thousands of descendants of Jesus likely would have been scattered along trade routes from western Europe to southern Africa to eastern Asia. After another 250 years, Jesus would have had millions of descendants. Repeat that cycle five more times and the whole world begins to fill up with descendants of Jesus.
,1,660304.story?coll=la-news-comment
asc_26
We don't interpret the bible literally.
Dubai Knight
Its a theory examined in the book 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' by Michael Baigent. the 'Merovingian' bloodline is supposed to have been carried through to the modern day, but remains a hidden society.
:?: :?: :?:
Knight
zam
:sad4:
mraph33
I came from monkeys
Chocoholic
Someone's been reading the Da Vinci Code.
zam
:read2:
shafique
There's a very interesting BBC documentary called 'Did Jesus Die' - it's pretty easy to find on the web, and I think it's even on youtube.
Details here
It deals first with the legends made famous by the Da Vinci code, but then spends more time looking at a claim that Jesus travelled to the East (after crucifixion) to preach to the Jewish tribes there and died in Kashmir. The tomb of Yus Asaph is claimed be that of Jesus and is shown with some quite eye-opening arguements.
It concludes with priests and scholars not dismissing the claims, but saying that Christianity wasn't necessarily redundant if this claim was true!
Worth watching.
Cheers,
Shafique