Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-03 > 1172959405

From: "John Paul Bradford" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] NY Times article on "Jesus" DNA
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 17:03:25 -0500
References: <>

I don't think the Shroud being ancient or medieval is a science versus
anti-science. The debate is between those promoting different scientific
views of the shroud's origin. If I am correct, there are blood stains on the
shroud. Perhaps if we get better at this, we will extract some DNA from it.
It will not help decide its origins, however.

God bless

John Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] NY Times article on "Jesus" DNA

>> As the shroud is medieval how would obtaining
>> DNA from it help with any religious enquiry?
> I guess you are right. I have not looked at the evidence recently.
> Aren't there still literally millions of people who believe
> the Shroud of Turin belongs to Jesus of Nazareth? On the
> other hand, if these people are not going to believe carbon
> dating or fabric analysis I guess they won't believe anything
> else scientific, so why bother.
> Still, if television producers would agree to pay for DNA testing
> to dispel the myth even further, I won't argue with that.
> The more the merrier. As long as the information is released
> to us.
> KJ
> <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free
> email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: