Related to Jesus and Marie Magdala?

Question

Has anyone else traced their tree as far back to Jesus - christe de Nazareth?

Comments

There are no accurate sources to go that far back, so I doubt that you can do this on Wikitree...

---

Plenty of lines here to connect to

https://books.google.com/books?id=KDNy_QkopMIC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Presidents-Holy-Grail-Nation/dp/0595333001

---

Thank you and good to know. However, I'm going to try and see.  Branching out from my Dad, Paul Hawkins Jr. to Joan Trelawney's Dad, William Trelawney (1474).  Please let me note that I haven't officially verified each and everyone of these sources.  However, I have been able to get a clear view of the extensive research Genealogist, Nancy Hunter has shown. My sources end at Athidldus Queen of the Salian Franks, Hasilda of the Franks. Her husband Richimir I King of the Franks b. 0015 BC - 0060. 

Follow the above to Jesus - christe de Nazareth.  

The following is one of the sources that I'd like to share.

http://www.ourfamilyhistories.org/getperson.php?personID=I932&tree=00

It's confusing to me because of the different spelling of the names.  Please forgive me if I have mislead in the wrong direction. 

I don't Know the Ropes and certainly don't want to seem like Three Sheets to the Wind because that would be embarrassing just want to learn and be Above Board.

---

Thing is, you share your distant ancestors with millions of cousins.  Nobody has a line back to Charlemagne that's just theirs.

In America, the immigrants are the bottlenecks.  You trace your line back to your immigrant, but his ancestry has already been thoroughly investigated by all his other descendants.  You aren't doing it on your own any longer.  You're just looking up what other people have done already.

(The sad part is that many immigrants have disappointing ancestry, and many people have felt the need to make up improved versions.  But again, this is everybody's problem, not just yours.)

I think the point of the Jesus Presidents book (which is junk) is to show that America is blessed.  But the way it works is by connecting the Presidents to a few key ancestors like Charlemagne and Malcolm Canmore, and then giving their alleged descent from Jesus.

Trouble is, we're all descended from Charlemagne and Malcolm Canmore, which means the Presidents are nothing special after all.

Basically, if anybody has a line of descent from Jesus, we must all have one.  In fact we must all share a large part of the same line.  Dan Brown's notion of a thin holy bloodline would be a miracle in itself.

So it's not something you have to work out for yourself.  The real question is, do we all descend from Jesus?  Which of course is potentially an interesting question for everybody.

Of course opinions will vary.  There are no facts or records.  The "research" consists of conjuring up possibilities.

Answer 1

Not me, but I haven’t asked the famous genealogist Dan Brown for his research yet. 

Comments

Links don't work, tried to cancel but wont let me

---

Take a look at “Bloodline of the Holy Grail - The Hidden Lineage of Jesus Revealed.”

HRH Prince Michael of Albany, head of the Royal House of Stewart, states on the dust jacket that this book  “ ... is a remarkable achievement in the field of genealogical research ... “

This is the ultimate conspiracy theory.

---

Same could be said, George, for “Holy Blood, Holy Grail,” whose authors claimed that Dan Brown stole their stuff for his book. They should  have entitled their book, “Hokey Blood, Hokey Grail.”

And you’re right, the ultimate conspiracy theory. A case where one sees only what they want to see, the rest of the evidence be damned.

---

This so-called Prince Michael claims descent from the extinct House of Stewart. His alleged descent has been shown to be phoney. He used to be a naturalized British citizen, but was expelled from the UK for using forged documents to "prove" his identity.

---

I remember being mesmerised by the original BBC programme back in 1972

You can view it here http://www.renneslechateau.nl/2008/05/18/shadow-of-the-templars/

The subsequent programmes became more and more incredible. Maybe, the realisation that it was a clever mix of fraud and imaginative interpretation taught me to be sceptical

Have to admit that when I was walking in the area a couple of years ago, I couldn't resist a detour to Rennes le Chateau (pretty place, 'new age' book shops, expensive places to eat and tatty museum)

---

Hi Take a look at this link.  Its to a very different place.  Lots of reading.

http://www.biblesearchers.com/yahshua/davidian/dynasty2.shtml#MaryFamousRevered

Answer 2

You mean Joseph and Mary. Jesus was never married

Comments

You do realize that people don't have to be married to have children.

---

He never had children either!

Answer 3

There is a Myth of Jesus being married, but just a myth.  If fact I have come across more than one person that claim to trace their lineage back to Jesus,through king David,  but I all ways revert back to Rabbi  Singer explanation on how that is impossible.

"Mary’s genealogy is completely irrelevant to Jesus’ supposed lineage to King David. For good reason, nowhere in the New Testament is Mary’s genealogy recorded.  Matrilineal ancestry is irrelevant to tribe identification. Both the first chapter of Matthew and in the third chapter of Luke contain a putative genealogy of Joseph alone. Although these two genealogies completely contradict each other, neither suggests that Mary was a descendant of king of David. Joseph’s genealogy is irrelevant to Jesus because according to two out of four Gospels claim that Joseph was not Jesus’ father. The author of the Book of Mark, the earliest of the four Gospels, knows nothing of a virgin birth, and accordingly, begins his book with the baptism of Jesus. The Book of John contains no infancy narrative.

Nowhere in the third Gospel, or in the entire New Testament, for that matter, is there a claim that Mary was a descendant of the House of David. On the contrary, Luke plainly asserts that it is Joseph who was from the House of David, not Mary.

    To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.

    (Luke 1:27)

In fact, Luke claims that Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth, who he says was a descendant of Aaron the high priest,1 placing her in the tribe of Levi, not David’s tribe of Judah. Moreover, in Luke 2:4, the author writes that the reason it was necessary for Joseph and Mary to return to Bethlehem was because it was Joseph, not Mary, who was from the House of David.

    And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David.
    (Luke 2:4)"

And lastly, the Bible  never mentioned who Mary's parents were,so impossible to trace her lineage.

IMO, if you believe all mankind began with Adam and Eve, then we are related to Jesus.