Q&A J R Lankford Author, The Jesus Thief Your thriller, The Jesus Thief depicts human cloning in a very clear and convincing way, but you began it back in 1999. Before we delve into the plot, how does your descipton compare to the actual first cloning of human embryos by Korean scientists anounced on February 12, 2004? When I began the novel I believed human cloning was inevitable. I did a great deal of research and concluded the process would use nuclear transfer and electrical fusion, which has turned out to be the case. The Jesus Thief describes the basic procedure Drs. Hwang and Moon have perfected. Now that their results are published, the world has the formula. For good or ill, we're officially in the age of human cloning. Most scientists want to pursue it to develop new therapies for disease. It will also surely be used for reproductive purposes. This makes me doubly glad that I went to such pains to give my readers a clear picture of the process. The more people who know what cloning is, and its challenges, the better our decisions about it. I understand Hollywood film rights have been optioned? You must be thrilled. Yes, very. It was one of those serendipitous occurrences that have happened with The Jesus Thief from the start. Not long into the writing, the story began unfolding in my mind as if I were watching a movie. I kept seeing the wonderful actress Alfre Woodard playing the role of my character, Maggie, and seeing Russell Crowe as my character, Sam. One day my brother, Dr. Jesse Rhines--who knew about my imaginings--, was at a party in New York. He saw Alfre Woodard, went up to her, and in a couple of sentences told her about my book. She asked to see it. I sent it overnight. A week later she was on the phone, saying she loved it and wanted to acquire the film rights. I don't know if she'll play the part of Maggie, herself, but I do feel my novel is "home." Now if my brother would just go to a party where Russell Crowe is ... Let's talk about what's got everyone so excited. In The Jesus Thief, your protagonist believes the famed Shroud of Turin is authentic, that Jesus really was wrapped in it upon his crucifixion, and that the bloodstains belong to him. Further, he believes the 2000-year-old genetic material could yield a viable sampling for cloning. Is any of this based on fact? Type AB male blood has reportedly been identified on the Shroud and that's what gave me the idea for this novel. It's a very rare blood type found in only 3.2% of the population, however it's more common in Israel. Very suggestive. Even a bit stunning. Under the right conditions, DNA can survive for long periods after death, but the DNA on the Shroud is, thankfully, badly fragmented. However, less than 1% of the human genome makes us the individuals we are. Science can't say it will forever be impossible to produce a clone from fragmented DNA Wasn't the Shroud found to be a fraud? In 1988, radio carbon tests dated the Shroud to the late 13th or early 14th centuries, but those results have been called into question. Shroud material containing nearly invisible patches from the 16th century may have been used. This would have skewed the test result. We'll never know if the Shroud is really the burial cloth of Jesus, but many feel it ought to be a lot easier to prove it's a fake and that's what makes it interesting. If Jesus could be cloned, should he be? As one of my characters says, "We've cloned a sheep, let's clone the Shepherd?" If it ever becomes possible, I have no doubt someone will try it. I like to think that God can prevent humans from tampering with the genes of his son if he wants. That doesn't mean someone wouldn't try it and claim it's the Son of God, creating a ruckus. Cloning isn't the only controversial theme in your novel. Your characters are from different religious backgrounds and the story ultimately blends Christianity and Judaism in ways that, for some, may radically depart from expectation. Was that deliberate? Yes. I've always hated the concept that the Jews killed Christ and the anti-Semitism it has produced. This novel gave me the chance to express that. Jesus, Mary and Joseph and everyone they knew were Jews. At the time, Christianity didn't exist. Generations later, to blame a whole people for the crucifixion was and is just ludicrous. It isn't even Christian to blame those who were actually there since, according to the Bible, Jesus forgave them with his last words on the cross. How do you think the various religions, the government, and the news media would really react to the existence of a Jesus clone? No safer today than two thousand years ago and that's one of the subplots in the novel. We'd have modern-day Herods. I think they'd first try to prevent the birth and if that didn't work, to discredit the clone and if that didn't work to destroy it. Shouldn't the Second Coming occur naturally, through the hand of God, if it's meant to happen at all, rather than artificially in a lab through a thieving scientist? In those days, the idea of the savior being born of a miraculously impregnated unwed Jewess was even more scandalous than his coming because of a thieving mad scientist today. Over and over the Bible demonstrates that God may have a taste for drama, though: Noah and his Ark, Jonah and his Whale, Lot's wife and that unfortunate pillar of salt. I thought: Why not Felix Rossi, The Jesus Thief, and his clone? You have Jesus coming to birth through a modern-day Virgin Mary -- a 35-year-old maid and devout Baptist from Harlem who never had sex. But you added a twist: she's black! Is the world ready for an African-American Jesus? A cloned Jesus wouldn't have the genes of his mother--except for the small amount of mitochondrial DNA from her egg. The Jesus Thief has a Black Madonna, not a Black Jesus, and this is far from a new idea. I asked myself: what's the modern-day social equivalent of a 1st century Jew? In America, we don't really have one. The closest thing is an underclass heavily populated by blacks. During the research I was amazed to learn that, until the Renaissance, Mary had black or brown skin in most depictions of her. Hundreds of Black Madonnas remain all over Europe. When I was in Italy for on-site research, I saw them. I didn't know this when I made Maggie a black woman. It made me wonder whether my choice was really a coincidence. You've also put a little sex in this novel via two of your other characters. Sam is one of the three main characters and he represents body. He's a real devil. He and Coral were fun to write. Felix, my somewhat mad scientist, represents mind, and Maggie is spirit. Through them I could depict the three aspects of human existence. When I was selecting my characters I thought of the company Jesus kept. Some were considered disreputable in his day, yet he loved them. I took a leaf from his page and put both sinners and saints in The Jesus Thief. If there comes a day when human cloning is possible -- and according to the news that day may be near -- do you think society will embrace it? Only if the medical and genetic risks are controlled. In spite of the Korean breakthrough, human cloning remains medically risky. It would still take multiple trials and the chances of miscarriage or severe birth defects could be high. But early on before the dangers were clear Stephen Hawking said, "The fuss about cloning is rather silly, I can't see any essential distinction between cloning and producing brothers and sisters in the time-honored way." I tend to agree that if the medical risk is controlled, we might begin to view cloning as just another way of producing twins, if a generation (or more) apart. Do you think there will be restrictions on who can be cloned, how many times one can be cloned, or if the clone can only be of a living person (or at least having acquired their consent)? If reproductive human cloning is ever permitted, I wouldn't be surprised if those convicted of violent crime lose their right to be cloned. Right now we're not sure whether criminality is partly genetic. What I hope and believe is that society will require written consent of the DNA donor. Otherwise, someone could conceivably pluck a hair from your shoulder, retrieve the DNA and clone you without your knowledge or permission. Cloning of the dead should be illegal, by that reasoning, since the dead can't give consent. Perhaps parents might be allowed to clone a dead child or a wife allowed to carry the clone of a dead husband. Let's hope we avoid the risk of human farming by limiting the number of times an individual can be cloned, though this is less likely since each clone would need a mother willing to carry it nine months. Is it possible that clones are already amongst us, maybe even that of Jesus? Not a clone of Jesus, but I believe it's at least possible human clones already exist for two reasons. First, the Clonaid group who claimed success last year withdrew because someone filed a suit in Florida. If DNA tests had proved cloning had occurred, the child might have become a ward of the state and been taken from its parents. If I'd been the mother, I certainly would have disappeared with my child. That may be the real reason we don't know if the Clonaid claim was true or not. Also, in 1978 David Rorvik published a book called In His Image: The Cloning of a Man which claims to recount the first human cloning, done in secret on behalf of a wealthy man who wanted an heir. Though it was later branded a hoax, there is enough detail in the book to convince me it could be true. I also think it's possible that other scientists, in private, have stumbled upon the same methods the Korean scientists used, cloned a human being for a client and kept it secret to avoid negative publicity. I doubt if there are many clones among us, though, and certainly--given today's technology--not one of Jesus. Science is often seen at odds or in conflict with religion. Would your book be a demonstration of science working to bring about validation for religion -- or would you see it as science using its God-like powers to subvert nature and humanity? I don't see a conflict between science and belief in a higher power and this is what The Jesus Thief depicts. In my experience, there's no faster route to religious belief than a true understanding of what science does and doesn't do. Science describes. It doesn't explain. Sometimes it describe in such detail that we don't notice the lack of explanation. The existence of life on earth, for instance. Life is extraordinarily complex and yet its billions and billions of minute subsystems, its quadrillions of natural events are perfectly synchronized. The scientific truth is that the odds of life being a fortunate accident are beyond incalculable. To me that suggests a deity. Who else do you believe would be a worthy clone, assuming the procedure is possible and that enough usable DNA exists to conduct the cloning? I'd volunteer so I could tell my clone: don't wait until you're 48 to start writing! Seriously, though, it would be interesting to see what a clone of Leonardo da Vinci would do with today's technology. What would a cloned Einstein do? A clone of Abraham Lincoln. What kind of novels would Dickens write today? If cloning dead humans becomes possible, should we destroy the remains of evil dictators like Stalin, Mussolini, Napoleon -- as well as those of mass murderers that could wreak havoc if brought to life? Like putting a stake through the vampire's heart to make sure it can't rise again? I think that's a bit dramatic but when human cloning becomes a reality, this will surely be discussed. Maybe it will be a new kind of death penalty: condemned to loss of life and destruction of your DNA as well. If it becomes apparent that clone personality and behavior are similar enough to that of the DNA donor, this may occur. Even if cloning humans is deemed unethical and/or illegal, could we really expect scientists with religious, political or financial agendas not to clone people, especially someone as prominent as Jesus? Cloning of both the living and the dead will surely be attempted, even if cloning is made illegal. That was one of my reasons for writing The Jesus Thief--to help us explore the inevitable, to put the issues and technology out there again in a way that anyone can understand. What does the Bible say in regards to cloning? Well, there are those who think Jesus may have been the first clone. If his DNA didn't come from Mary, then it must have come from God. Some might say the story of feeding the multitude with two fish is a metaphor for cloning. But, to my knowledge, the Bible doesn't speak directly on the subject. It does say God created Adam from dust, Eve from Adam's rib and fertilized Mary by a miracle. Maybe He doesn't think creating people without sexual intercourse is so bad. What kind of reactions are you getting from readers? Do some say it's sacrilegious or blasphemy? The vast majority I've heard from report feeling what I felt during the writing -- a genuine sense of wonder and awe. Many have found The Jesus Thief to be a page-turner and called it breathtaking, even magnificent, and I'm so grateful for these reactions. Not surprisingly, a few don't want any sex in a novel about Jesus. A handful have called it blasphemous and I don't disagree, but one person's blasphemy is another's belief and I want to emphasize that this is fiction, not a new Bible. That said, I've never been able to believe that buildings and books were sacred. Mosques, temples, churches, bibles? Life is sacred. Us. And the earth. That's what God made. Not a building or a book. To me, there is nothing wrong with creating fiction from a religious story as long as the basic message is one of love. Every religion teaches us to love one another. If we'd actually do it, life would be fine. Instead, we kill to defend our books and our buildings. In the Judeo-Christian traditions, many supposedly pious people live as if Moses brought the 10 Suggestions down from the mountain instead of the 10 Commandments, yet they attack others for not giving lip service to the book they do. If such people don't like The Jesus Thief, that's okay with me. At the conclusion of your novel, the protagonist -- a scientist -- arrives at a point in his spiritual development that he doesn't care about which religious sect he belongs to, but he professes a belief in God. What message are you trying to convey here? I believe that all roads lead to God. Since God is the source of everything, according to all religions, where else could a road go? This is the theme of the sequel I'm writing and it's what I wanted to convey through Felix. It's what I think Jesus was telling us in the parable of the Good Samaritan. He was saying religious creed is secondary to the actual practice of love. That's what Felix learns in The Jesus Thief. You do not have a background in religious scholarship or medicine or genetics, yet experts in these fields have read and enjoyed your book. How did you go about researching material for The Jesus Thief? I learned long ago that complicated subjects consist of very simple ideas--maybe hundreds or thousands of them, but at their core each is simple. Fortunately, I love to learn new things then peel down to that simple core in a way that any reader can understand. For The Jesus Thief, having a B.S. in electrical engineering and a minor in physics was a great help. I dug into papers and books as if I were back in college and, for each subject, found one or more experts to give me basic guidance and talk with if I got lost. Then, when I was done, I asked them to read the manuscript. For religious aspects I studied Huston Smith's The World's Religions, The Jesus Seminar's results, the Bible, and translations from the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. I read a number of books about the Jews of Italy and otherwise consulted with Jewish experts. The research was an absolute joy and more successful than even I imagined because few have found the theological content offensive -- irrespective of their religious belief or lack thereof. However, a prominent cloning scientist found The Jesus Thief spellbinding, and is worried that people will think it could soon be real, so let me say again that this is fiction. How similar do you believe a clone and cell donor would be in personality and ability? They'd be the equivalent of twins who have a 70% correlation in intelligence and ability. Assumedly, they'd be no more or less problematic. What is your viewpoint about proposed bans on reproductive and/or therapeutic cloning research? On the same day The Jesus Thief came out, The House passed a bill, 241-155, banning human cloning for both reproductive and therapeutic purposes. Fortunately, the Senate became mired in debate. The UN scheduled a vote last November to recommend cloning be banned worldwide, then put it off for two years. I was glad. I thought and still think outright bans can be dangerous in that they drive science underground and into the hands of potentially irresponsible people. Now that human embryos were cloned in Korea, the world has a new technology with rather huge economic, medical, and ethical dimensions. I don't know the answers. I just know we can't stop this, however many laws we pass. As a nation, we have an important first issue to decide: Should restrictions on cloning research be lifted or not? If not, will other countries develop cloning-based knowledge and therapies that revolutionize medical science, leaving America behind? Do you ultimately favor human cloning? Even after all my research, I am still undecided. I just know it's inevitable, so we must face it. Emotionally, I feel as ambivalent about the idea of risking health to create new life as I do about the idea of destroying pre-embryos to save life. But then I think of the sick who might be cured, of infertile couples desperate for a child who has their genes. Society presently condemns maverick cloning scientists (cowboy cloners) in the same way it condemned early in-vitro fertilization scientists back in the 60's and 70's. Yet they succeeded, became heros, and in-vitro fertilization was eventually embraced. The same thing may happen here. Whether it should happen, I don't know. What inspired you to write The Jesus Thief? Science and religions are two of my passions. I couldn't NOT write The Jesus Thief once I learned from a documentary that Type AB male blood was reportedly found on the Shroud. To explore the issues involved in human cloning in the context of resurrecting Jesus of Nazareth was irresistible. I was determined to do it justice with believable characters, real science, and real settings. It turned out to be one of the most rewarding experience of my life. I met wonderful people in my travels, especially at Turin's Great Synagogue, and l learned fascinating things such as why and how Italy saved 90% of its Jews from the Nazis in WWII. Every time I hit a wall it seemed to simply melt away, as if the book has its own guardian angel. The Jesus Thief is a labor of love, second only to the sequel underway. I've completed a first draft and am imagining a third book which would make this a trilogy.