I'm trying to decide if I'm more amused by your insight or the fact that you called them "Josh" and "Madge".
Doesn't 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' (or some similar bundle of hilarity) posit that Judas was Jesus' brother? Or his dad. Or his hoover. Aaaaaaaah!
What clinched it for me was the way that, when asked if they'd checked the DNA of the various family members to verify they were even related to one another, the documentary* makers replied "No, we're not scientists."I saw the same team's Exodus documentary a while ago. It was baseless balderdash, but it had some nice computer graphics. *I use the term loosely.
The Bible says that Jesus had a brother (or half brother, or cousin) called Judas. Hyam Maccabee, who is clever but mad, thinks that Judas the Borther of Jesus, Judas Iscariot, and Jude the Obscure are all the same person.I looked under "theological considerations" on the Discovery Channel's website. The first thing it said was:In the Gospel of Matthew (28:12) it states that a rumor was circulating in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ crucifixion. This story holds that Jesus' body was moved by his disciples from the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, where he was temporarily buried. Ostensibly, his remains were taken to a permanent family tomb. The first bit is true. The second bit, ("his remains were taken to a permenant family tomb") they made up. Out of their heads. It goes on If Jesus’ mortal remains have been found, this would contradict the idea of a physical ascension but not the idea of a spiritual ascension. The latter is consistent with Christian theology.To which one can only say "No, it isn't."I suppose you could be thicker than a thick person who has got a degree from the university of thick when it comes to writing about about theology, but still be a pretty good archaelogist. But it doesn't, shall we say, inspire confidence.