Archaeology and the “Bloodline Conspiracy”
Photo of the findings
A tomb discovered near the Rennes-le-Chateau church in France contains several artifacts that date to first century Jerusalem. According to a news report, the tomb also contains a mummified corpse draped in a shroud bearing a red cross.
These discoveries are used in a new film, “Bloodline,” to challenge the death and resurrection of Christ. The movie was directed by Bruce Burgess and produced by René Barnett. The film promotes the “bloodline conspiracy.” The premise of the film is that “Jesus married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child with her. After the crucifixion, Mary escaped Roman-controlled Judea by sea along with the child and their servants, eventually ending up in modern day southern France.”
Israeli archaeologist Gabi Barkay describes the content of the tomb. According to the news report,
One of the pottery vessels, he said, is an ungentarium jar typically used for perfumes, while the other is a small bowl known as unguent ware. The glass vessel is an elongated alabastra, also known as a "tear bottle," made of blown glass. Some thirty coins were also found dating primarily to the Hasmonean, Herodian, and Byzantine Periods, with a single silver coin of the Crusader period minted in Jerusalem.
Without commenting on the validity of the "bloodline conspiracy" story of the movie, Barkay said that all of the objects found in the wooden chest, besides of course the Crusader coin, are indeed of the 1st century BCE-1st century CE and of Judean origin. He said that they are "very typical to Second Temple Period Jerusalem," and that "they can be found in large numbers in tombs in Jerusalem, but in other parts of Judea as well."
This is another attempt at contradicting the message of the Gospel. There is no evidence that these findings will be the “smoking gun” that will prove that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were husband and wife. The fact is, there is no “smoking gun.” Notwithstanding all the efforts to prove that Jesus was just a mere human, the testimony of the biblical text is that Jesus was the Son of God.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bloodline Conspiracy, Gabi Barkay, Jesus, Mary Magdalene,
Labels: Bloodline Conspiracy, Gabi Barkay, Jesus, Mary Magdalene
posted by Dr. Claude Mariottini @ 5/04/2008 08:31:00 PM
9 comments
links to this post
9 Comments:
Obviously we don't have the big theory about what these artifacts are supposed to prove exactly, yet, but without more than this we could set a dozen fiction writers to work envisioning backstories for these objects and get a dozen (or more) ideas of how and why they got to France.
Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to be more plausible.
I'll be curious to see just what these artifacts are supposed to prove.
Chuck
The story that Mary Magdalene, along with two other Marys, travelled to France is a long standing one, dating back at least to the Middle Ages. They are believed to have landed at Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer in the Camargue. They are supposed to have had a young woman with them called Sarah, venerated as Saint Sarah, patron saint of the Roma people. If there is some truth to this story, it could explain the artefacts found. But there is no evidence to back the recent theory that Sarah was the daughter of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and these kinds of finds can never be that evidence.
Chuck,
You are right, when people let their minds be creative, they can create magnificent stories that
have no basis on reality.
I am sure that, if we had all the details, we could find a simple explanation why those artefacts
were found in France. However, since we do not have any detail, it becomes easier to create a
story to fit the evidence. I believe this is what has happened with this movie.
Claude Mariottini
Peter,
Thank you for this information. I am sure that the findings might be related to believers who in
the distant past traveled from Palestine to France. However, as you said, these findings will
never prove that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were husband and wife. This is just another attempt
at making some money or gaining some publicity with a legendary story that may have no basis
in history.
Claude Mariottini
I come from Camargue and know all my life the old stories of Saintes Maries de la Mer. They only tell of Marie-Jacobe and Marie-Salome arrival there, not Marie-Madeleine. In the church if you read when the culte was founded in 1448 it is the two Maries only. The legends never say Ste. Sarah was in the boat, it says she was there when the saintes arrive and became their servant. It is only tourists who come to the fete each year looking for Madeleine but the citizens only laugh at the foolish story. Also Rennes-le-Chateau is far away to the west in the mountains, not near to Saintes Maries at all, so how can this prove anything?
Chantal, thanks for the correction. We still have the story of early Christian people from Palestine coming to southern France, and these artefacts could have been brought by them or another similar group of people.
I enjoyed my own brief visit to Saintes Maries de la Mer several years ago, but remember it mainly for the flamingoes.
Chantal,
Thank you for this information. It is good to receive this information from someone who lives in the area and know the legends that have been transmitted through the years. Tourists, specially American tourists, can be very gullible and believe almost anything it is told them. I agree with you that these remains cannot prove anything.
Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
Peter,
Thank you for your words to Chantal. Do you believe these findings prove anything? If they are genuine, it only proves that some people from Palestine came to France and nothing else.
Claude Mariottini
No, these findings prove nothing. If they were found near Saintes Maries they might suggest some truth to the story of the two Marys. But given the distance the most they can suggest is that that story is not far-fetched, because people were moving from 1st century Palestine to what is now southern France. And of course there is nothing in the traditional story to suggest that the party included a daughter of Jesus.
But I should point out that if Jesus were to have had a daughter, and even if there were a surviving bloodline from her, that would be no threat at all to my faith. I believe Jesus was fully human and fully divine, so fully capable of fathering a child. And since we can't be sure that he was not married, to do so would not necessarily have been immoral. But the child, offspring of the humanity of Jesus, would just be an ordinary human child.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home