Author Topic: Descendants of Christ?  (Read 101713 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #60 on: June 23, 2010, 04:04:26 PM »
I meant to say ancestor, not descendant. argh


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #61 on: June 25, 2010, 04:39:51 PM »
Even though I'm Christian

 but hey he was in 30s when he was Crucified so I see why not if he had descendants.


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #62 on: September 16, 2010, 06:54:46 AM »
I believe the early Capets married descendants of the Merovingians, so that would be the link, but obviously proving Merovingians were descendants of Jesus Christ's secret love child is a bit more complicated. God-on-Earth having kids to rule the thrones (the very thrones he himself refused because an earthly kingdom wasn't what he was about), I dunno, doesn't ring true for some reason.


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #63 on: November 29, 2010, 09:06:36 PM »
I hate to be pushy, mean, or authoritative, but,

It is an Article of Faith Jesus was the only Child of a Virgin Birth, and, Mary remained a Virgin ever afterwards!

He did however, have cousins, one of whom (Saint Jude Thadeus) had heirs who are the Hereditary Patriarchs of the Catholic Church in India [NB Herediary Patriarch means at least one priest must marry!  But no priest of the Latin Rite may marry, and no other married priest may attain the rank of Bishop!

Did you know, there are basically 7 Popes, all in communion with one and another?  Giving Primacy in the Papal Claims to the Bishop of Rome, to arbitrate!

Prinz Heinrich von Reuss can surely tell you about it.  How did such heresy ever start?  Some bastard king no doubt!

[Edit]  There are seven Churches founded by the Apostles, and together form the Catholic or "Universal" Church--Each has a Patriarch, which means Pope.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2010, 09:25:31 PM by capttrips »

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #64 on: November 30, 2010, 08:24:59 AM »
Having read 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' I can confidently say that it is tripe!

Medieval dynasties routinely claimed descent from gods. All the anglo-Saxon dynasties except that of Essex claimed to be descended from the pagan god Woden (the Essex dynasty claimed descent from the otherwise unknown god Seaxnot). Following their conversion to Christianity, the dynasty of Wessex tacked on an Old Testament descent for Woden and traced their lineage back to Noah.

Incidentally, the Ethiopean dynasty claim descent from Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.



  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #65 on: December 01, 2010, 11:01:54 PM »
Not all bold claims are heresy:  Just anything to do with descent from Jesus and his mother.  I hear all kinds of crazy things about my Kuhns--most crazy of which is Paul had a disciple who wove tents, and that is how the Church in Rome first made its money.

I believe nothing but what the Church tells me to believe.


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #66 on: March 08, 2011, 04:25:10 PM »
^ Its better to follow your heart and senses to believe then what someone tells you to believe in.

Naslednik Norvezhskiy

  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #67 on: March 08, 2011, 05:09:36 PM »
I believe the early Capets married descendants of the Merovingians, so that would be the link
No, they married descendants of the Carolingians. Nobody has been able to prove that the Merovingians didn't go extinct.

God-on-Earth having kids to rule the thrones (the very thrones he himself refused because an earthly kingdom wasn't what he was about), I dunno, doesn't ring true for some reason.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2011, 05:16:16 PM by Фёдор Петрович »


  • Guest
Re: Descendants of Christ?
« Reply #68 on: November 24, 2011, 12:48:40 AM »
There were actually two versions of "Holy Blood Holy Grail" the book.  The first one had a detailed genealogy, but my copy was destroyed in the Los Alamos fire of 2000.  I wanted to reread it while I was studying Stuart genealogy, and so I bought another copy, which was a total rewrite and had no complete genealogy in it.  I lost the second copy in a move, and was not sorry to lose it, as it was an inferior rewrite, and I thought at the time it was written to accommodate two theories, one the new Da Vinci Code theory, and the other theory that a certain man from the continent was the actual pretender to the Stuart throne (the latter having later been shown to be a complete fraud). 

I feel there probably are people living (many) who are descendants of Jesus' family.  Roman Catholics believe Mary had no more children after Jesus, but Protestants believe there were several brothers and at least two sisters, since the gospels refer to his "sisters" plural.  Catholics think these are cousins rather than sisters.  The most prominent brother was James, who became head of the church at Jerusalem, and who apparently was not a follower of Jesus before His resurrection.  If these were brothers and sisters rather than cousins, it seems very likely there were descendants, at least a few, although the church was persecuted in the time of James, and James himself was killed.

So I think that even if Jesus had no children, He probably had nephews and nieces.  So there you have a "bloodline" of sorts.

I do not think it negates Jesus' divinity if He married and had children.  The big problem would be, in my thinking, that there would be children
who were not holy at all, and who would use their descendancy to lord it over everyone, which God could not have allowed.  So if He had children, this would have been top secret.  And never have leaked out in such second-rate versions as the Da Vinci Code.  His children would not be holy in the sense that He was, not being divine, but just human.  Jesus had both a divine and a human nature, but these children would have only human natures, even if they had noble natures.

Concerning the descent of the British royals from ancient Israel, it is traced through an Irish queen who was one of two daughters of Zedekiah who escaped slaughter when the sons of Zedekiah were murdered by the invader.  The legend is that the Prophet Jeremiah and his scribe Baruch
took the girls away.  They went to Egypt first, where one of them married another Jewish royal person--they being both descended from Judah,
and the princess being descended from King David.  This prince whom she married took her back to Ireland, where there was already a Jewish
community of long standing, and there they ruled from "Tara".  This legend states that Jeremiah is buried there in northern Ireland, and I have an
on-line Christian acquaintance who states that he has visited the grave of Jeremiah, which is available for all to see. 

The second daughter of Zedekiah to escape from Israel is said to have settled in Spain and married there.  The names of these girls have been given variously, so I am not sure which is the correct form.  "Tia Tephi" is mentioned, but also "Zara", which is the name of Princess Ann's daughter---did Ann choose  this name remembering a legend? 

Eleven per cent of Irish people in Ireland are said to have Haplogroup J1c on their mitochondrial descent, linking them to both Jews and Arabs of ancient times, underlying the overarching non-royal story that there was a group of Jews who migrated early to Ireland.    My maternal haplotype is J1C2b, which I found out through a genetic study done by a Stanford-related group.  My mother was Irish, and was a part of this particular
group.  This is not a royal descent, no claim there.

The Stuart family came to Scotland through England (Shropshire) where they lived for a couple of generations after crossing the channel--they had been "prime ministers" of Dol in France.  Then they moved on to Scotland, being forced out of England by politics and warfare in the fight
over the succession of  William the Conqueror.  Were they originally of that group which came through Ireland?  I think it is possible.  But there were other families in Scotland, including the Stuarts, who signed the Treaty of Abroath in the l4th century and claimed they had arrived in Scotland through the migration from Scythia to the Holy Land, to Spain, to Ireland, and on to Scotland.  Complex, with many families involved.  But that is some of the background of how the Stuarts claim descent from King David of Judah.  They many have a slightly different version, but
that is the outline.