Regarding the Talpiot Tomb (alleged burial place of Jesus and his relatives): Is it possible that the tomb has more credibility of being Jesus' grave if the perpetual virginity/brethren-means-cousins theory is true?
How so? I used to be RCC and still have't rid myself of thinking like that totally (perpetual virginity, brethren-means-cousins theories) but I just don't see how they coincide (maybe I'm being dim).
Because they say the relatives in the tomb are not directly related to the Jesus remains, although other arguments may cast doubt on it being the Jesus we're thinking of, nonetheless. People mentioned that the frequency of tombs with such similar names, those being very common, was not all that rare in archaeology.
But doesn't others in the tomb show more conclusively that it is Jesus, as it was Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, originally?
Uhm, what? The Talpiot Tomb is an archaeological discovery that claims to be the remains of Jesus and his family. It was part of the so-called "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" documentary. I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
I myself am firmly convinced the tomb of Jesus is to be found in the aedicule of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and nowhere else. It also pains me that Anglicans do not have formal access to that church for worship (the Fraciscans who represent Rome could easily incorporate Anglicans, if they cared). For that matter the Assyrians also lack access, and that also pains me.