St. Mary Magdalene - Could relics recently found in Historic Jamestowne Virginia, be that of St. Mary Magdelene?

our ancestor i talk for mine precisly was not catholic HELL NO loll
in europe before no it was long later it was a forced conversion some decide to get in to a better inflitration probably other comunauty do the same

so the catholics thing must be debunked. did some one fall in the trap..i bet yes

http://www.speroforum.com/a/XXKUVEUKYJ49/76221-Archaeologists-disco...
i was anwser this not the link of justin......

fort caroline french..

Hello all. Both Alfred "Ed Moch" Cota and I went to Jamestowm this past September 8th. Upon our arrival, we did not know about the recent discoveries and we were very surprised.
We got a chance to talk with Dr. James Horn privately and Rev./Dr. Cota identified himself. I being a witness, they both discussed the nature of the artifacts and relic box. He said he was a related cousin to Capt. Gabriel and John Rolph, but there was a set of symbols found on the box that Dr. Horn shared.
Rev./Dr. Cota said that the symbols on the box were Templar in nature, in which Dr, Horn said that Capt. Archer's remains were pointed in the direction of The Middle East or Jerusalem? More tests are being to discern if the relic artifact of authentic or false. Be it what it may, the finding of this artifact opens up some big questions.
Recently, Rev./Dr. Cota found in my Geni charts that I am a Great Great Grand Daughter+ to Thomas Grey "The Ancient Planter" of Jamestowne and that his careful research seems to echo what Dr.'s Horn and Kelso are finding .

Is the "Rev./Dr. Cota" of your message the same person as the Ed Moch who started this thread? If so, seems a bit odd because it means that the speculation about Templar symbols is just Ed's opinion and not an idea from the excavation team.

3 of the 4 were my cousins. Thanks Justin for the last two names in the graves!
Sir Ferdinando Wainman of Jamestown is my 14th cousin 10 times removed.
Capt. Sir William West of Jamestown is my 12th cousin 16 times removed.

Captain William West of Jamestown is my 7th cousin 10xremoved http://www.geni.com/path/Judy-Rice+is+related+to+Capt-Sir-William-W... and Sir Ferdinando Wainman of Jamestown is my 7th cousin 10xremoved http://www.geni.com/path/Judy-Rice+is+related+to+Sir-Ferdinando-Wai... so of the 4 are my cousins

Justin,

Once again, there is NO credible evidence to Jesus ever existing, outside the bible. If you wish to believe there is on a "religious basis," by all means have out it. But spurious information had no place in a 'serious' debate on the subject. Which it looks like we all are not having. That's just as well. Serious debates tend to be rather boring especial concerning religion. There being no REAL EVIDENCE of any of them have any true basis in fact.

As for myself, I believe Jesus existed. I believe he was a man like any other man. And most probably the son of Joseph, whom I believe was the TRUE king of the Jews, being a descendant of the line of David.

However, I don't believe any of it to be in any way, shape or form to be "miraculous," as I quite believing in fairy-tales long ago.

There has never been any proof of Jesus' existence, outside the bible. I believe it would made the National News. From what I can see, the closes it's ever come to being proven was the discovery of the 'ossuary.'

Justin,
P.S., Just because there might be a majority opinion on something does NOT make the majority right. After all, there was a majority opinion in favor of slavery as little as 160 years ago. The prosecutor of the Witch Trials in Salem, Mass had the majority on his side, I believe.

A far as Paul / Saul goes, I think he was a Roman spy sent to subvert this new Jewish sect that called themselves 'Christians'. Now he may have gotten caught up in it and became a 'True Believer'. As did a young corporal sent by the German Army to spy on an order that called themselves the National Socialists, around 1921.

But for my money Paul always remained a Roman spy, who was there to subvert the cause. In doing so he went on his own throughout the Roman-Greek world preaching a message of love and tolerance. Which is not what the true message was.

If you get a chance look up 'Pesharim', a code to read what the 'true' message was. A way to read between the line, so to speak. But in his efforts to subvert Paul created what we now have come to know as the Christian Doctrine.

Michael, you are just plain wrong. There is credible evidence outside the Bible that Jesus existed, in the form of two passages from Josephus. They are credible, because by definition credible for most of the world means they are accepted as genuine by the majority of experts.

You don't believe they're credible evidence, but that's essentially irrelevant to anyone but you. It doesn't mean you're a crackpot, but the personal belief of a non-expert is not a particularly persuasive argument.

Don't think I'm being mean. The same criticism applies to my own belief. I happen to be in the comfortable position of accepting the majority opinions of experts on a variety of topics ranging from Jesus to DNA testing to the earth revolving around the Sun. But what I believe is just as irrelevant as any other non-expert.

I'm not going to take your bait to start a religious argument. That would have no place on Geni. But, I wonder if you are able to see why comparing popular opinion on an ethical question like slavery does not illustrate anything about the likelihood that scientists and historians are correct about their conclusions.

Back to the original post in this thread -- the silver reliquary is engraved with an "M," but nothing else as far as I can tell. The ampule hasn't been cleaned up because they can't get into the box without destroying it.

Where are the Templar symbols on this reliquary, or indeed any symbols besides the M?

Nothing I've found so far is telling me. Would love to hear.

Justin,

Evidence; what is evidence of a historical figures existence? Evidence is written documentation of a person / figure during their lifetime. Not five, ten, twenty, or thirty-four years after their death.

Every Caesar, even the most minor ones, as far as I'm aware of were written about during their lifetime.

There is NO, NONE, NOT A SINGLE word about Jesus during his lifetime. The first mention of him comes around 67 A.D. . If he died when it states in that book you hold so dear. I think it was around year 33 A.D. (note the Masonic hint there) it would have been 34 years since his death before a single word about him is mentioned.

This in an era when the average age at death was around 45 years old. Imagine a future where a new religion bursts on the scene. People begin worshiping the Savior, the Messiah Harry Potter in the year 2031. Even though there never really was a Harry Potter.

I've already mention the fraudulent insertion into Joseph's work by the early Catholic Church. If you'll just bother to read my above statement.

There is not one single shred of written proof of Jesus' existence. People have been looking for that for the past 2000 years. Even to the point of creating fraudulent evidence as the Catholic Church has done because there just is NOT ANY EVIDENCE; NONE at ALL!

It's absolutely true that the best historical evidence for the existence of a human being would be contemporary documentation, from an unbiased source.

But it's not true that historians think that only those sources are real evidence, especially in the cases of ancient personages. Sometimes nothing was written about them till later; sometimes we know that contemporary sources once existed but are now lost. Herodotus, for instance, doesn't have a biography for a few hundred years after his death. There is a lot of evidence that Alexander existed, but the contemporary biography is lost.

So, yes, contemporary evidence is the gold standard (always taking into account the bias of the author) but it's not the only acceptable evidence to historians.

One takes into account the reason the documents were constructed; the bias of the authors; the relationship of documents; the history of the survival of the documents and their transmission. But good historical evidence isn't always contemporary.

Building on Anne's point --

There is a very nice little book called "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code". It is written by Bart Ehrman, chair of Religious Studies at University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Most Americans will recognize Chapel Hill as one of the most prestigious American universities for religious studies. Ehrman himself is a famous agnostic.

In this book Ehrman lays out four criteria historians use for judging Biblical claims, including the existence of Jesus:

1. The earlier the source, the better.

2. The number of sources that independently say the same thing.

3. Stories that "cut across the grain". That is, stories that are embarrassing or should have been cut out if they author were trying to censor the material.

4. Context is almost everything. Since Jesus was a 1st century Jew, the stories that portray him that way are more likely to be accurate than stories that show him as a Hindu sage (for example).

Ehrman has no doubt that Jesus was a real person. I recently watched a lecture he gave for the American Atheist folks. He told them very clearly and plainly that there is no serious scholar in the world today who thinks Jesus was a myth, and that they're hurting their credibility with academics by advocating such silliness.

A while back, I also listened to some Youtube lectures by Richard Carrier, the foremost advocate of the "Jesus is a myth" school of thought. His main point is always that the people who have always said Jesus is a myth have been a lunatic fringe, grasping at straws and ruining the whole field with arguments that can be easily disproved. The point of his work, he says, is that there it really is possible to see Jesus as a myth, but first you have to give up all the arguments people have made so far ;)

i sugest deleting jesus fictional,myth ..from geni and st mary all saints we dont need this and all fictional just keep later prooved 16xx

You're a clever fisherman Justin.

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/History/jesushistory.html

If you really want a challenge see: The Jesus Birther Movement (JBM)
they are offering a prize to ANYONE who can prove Jesus is a real historical person.

A clever gimmick. This is one of the groups Dr. Richard Carrier says is doing so much damage to the idea that Jesus was mythical by their half-baked pseudo-scholarship.

so many people didn't have prove their exists.2035 years ago.

Yesu (Jesus) was the literal rightful heir and King of Judea. He was a Torah Jew and condemned the Talmud, Talmudic Judaism and declared those 'Jews', literal children of the Devil.

Torah Judaism was a cross-pollination of multiple schools, philosophies, sciences and religions.

Yesu was a Nazaryan and did not practice or endorse Judaism.

The 'Law' that Jethro (the Priest of Midian) delivered to Moses, was not a 'divine' law but a wilderness/desert tribal law.

The Torah was adopted, as 'Common', sometimes 'religious' and civil law that is, by rule of law everyone could accept and understand, to weigh and measure a multi-cultural, philosophical and religious society, with equity and justice.

However the Levitical and religious law had nothing to do with common people, it's solely for those whom were literally born into the hereditary office of Levitical priesthood.

Melchi-Zedek (the eternal priesthood of the White Serpent or Dragon) abolished the need for the Levitical priesthood and religious law.

I speak as a Dragon (for all those whom Nick described genetically as, 'having something extra in their picnic baskets').

Speaking of the 'Law'- the Ten Commandments carefully extracted from the Forty-Two Confessionals in The Egyptian Book of the Dead...

How does a Confessional (admonishing the leaders) become a Commandment (admonishing the people) but by treacherous evil tyranny?

Justin Durand knowing this thread had a different direction but based on a couple comments you made, felt that you didn't understand my faith of 'The Way'... :P

I AM NOT an Evangelical.

Thomas, in fairness to you I should clarify my comments.

My partner owns a bookstore that sells books on this topic and I work for the trade association that helps stores like that. I have a pretty good idea what you believe because I talk to people almost every day who have the same or similar beliefs.

I didn't mean to imply that you're an Evangelical Christian. Not at all. What I meant was that any time someone starts pushing their beliefs they are an evangelist for their belief system.

I don't like to see that on Geni. People have been looking at Jesus for 2000 years and deciding they know who he was and what he taught. They can't all be right ;)

(jBM) The Jesus Birther Movement. There years funning and nobody has as yet proven Jesus actually existed.

I believe Thomas Louis Kalani O'Kelly has some very good points.

Also the lack of "verifiable" proof should make this who idea on Geni a non-starter since this is a web page supposedly devoted to genealogy.

Justin,

It's amazing that anything you don't like or agree with becomes "pseudo";
"pseudo-history", "pseudo-science", "pseudo-scholarship".

I'm almost at the point of saying "it sound like a bunch of pseudo-crap to me.

"since this is a web page supposedly devoted to genealogy."

so stop getting worked up on the jesus issue when you could be devoting your energy into researching the millions of real people yet to be added to geni?

Michael, at a certain point you have to notice that in our culture the experts define reality. What they think is true is the mainstream opinion. Everything else is pseudo.

You can believe the earth is flat and no one will care, but you can't reasonably object if people choose to call it pseudo-science.

Anyone from our media savvy world ought to be able to see the JBM gimmick.

Anyone can put up a webpage offering a million dollars to someone who can prove something, then just refuse to accept the evidence offered. All you have to do is say "no, I don't think that's good enough".

That's why they say there's a sucker born every minute.

Jason,

That's a very good point. It is after all a genealogy page.

I wish to thank Justin for pointing out Dr. Richard Carrier. I've just watch a talk of his on YouTube. He states " there is no evidence for a historical Jesus." Thus he supports the position I made first off. Yet Justin tried to make it sound like he, Dr. Carrier, was opposed to this very idea. Slick Justin, very slick.

Dr. Carrier stated "there were tons of Christian forgeries." He further goes on to describe Jesus as a figure Jews were envisioning as a mythical son of god and or high priest of god, long before the Jesus of the bible was supposed to exist.

Jesus was a common enough name in that era. I, however, believe there was a historical Jesus. Not supernatural or magical. I believe he was the son of Joseph, the rightful King of the Judea. I believe he, this crown prince de jure, wanted the Roman out of "his" kingdom. With Jewish sentiment running in that direction, I think the mythological Jesus and the de jure crown Prince my have merged into one rebellious movement to push the Romans out. This new movement might have foster this rebellious idea in the beginning. But after the Jewish defeat and destruction it took a more placid tone lest it be destroyed also by Roman power. I think Paul / Saul was Rome's inside man to turn it to it new more pleasant and placid demeanor. Of course, just like the bible itself, I can't prove any of this.

Michael,

Go back and re-read what I wrote, without the preconceived idea that I'm saying what you want me to be saying.

I pointed out Richard Carrier as an example of a respectable scholar who does not believe in the historical Jesus. AND, I pointed out that he thinks most of the people (including the JBM) who've tried to make that argument in the past have been wrong about the evidence.