Check out this story by Philly Inquirer reporter Peter Mucha here. This is the first one I have seen that begins to think about the implications of the “Jesus was married” issue for the Talpiot tombs. Recall that the two main objections to the Talpiot tomb=family tomb of Jesus of Nazareth hypothesis were: 1) the names are common; 2) Jesus was never married or with children. The name frequency claim has been totally and thoroughly refuted. You can get a sample of the statistical discussion by searching at Bible & Interpretation for “Talpiot tomb.” But what about the “Jesus was never married” evidence? I think that is what we are now dealing with.
Talpiot itself does not prove or disprove anything but it fits a married Jesus and does not fit a celibate Jesus–so at least we have that to think about. It is one or the other, there is no neutral ground.
See my recent posts for my reasons for concluding, in contrast to my view in 2006 when I wrote The Jesus Dynasty, that Jesus was most likely married, see my recent blog posts linked here.