I may have mentioned this before – so if I did, sorry. There was a documentary a few years back called something like the Lost Tomb of Jesus where some believe they have found the tomb of Jesus and his family – including descendants. It was either on Discovery or on the History channel. It was an interesting documentary, and they made a decent case but certainly not convincing beyond a reasonable doubt. For any one who enjoys the historical aspects of the story of Jesus, this was a good one.

Okay – just looked it up. Lost Tomb of Jesus – Discovery Channel.

Interesting! I just checked it out.

My conclusions are that either it was a different family, an ancient hoax, or something more mundane. My reason for thinking that is again that although life would have been difficult for any child of Christ, the Israeli people were desperately seeking a messiah to free them from the Romans. Even if they didn't like Jesus' preaching non-violence, I'm positive that they would have used any child to their advantage, after "remaking" him the way they wanted him to act…

Just my opinion though!

This is just my (somewhat heretical) take on the situation. Any knowledge that Jesus had been released from the crucifixion (it was a very slow way to die after all) and lived to father children would have had a devastating effect on the perceived legitimacy of his teachings.

That's allways been the Achilles Heel of organized religion. They can't admit that they were ever wrong about anything without losing the divine seal of approval. If they said for centuries that it was all the word of God, what happens when they have to say "well, except for that one little thing we were wrong about"? People all start to wonder what else they got wrong, and their "Holy Authority" erodes faster than a salt pillar in a flash flood. That's why they have to keep up the company line, no matter how obvious it is that they're lying.

The Roman Catholic church had way too much to lose to ever let the progeny of Jesus ever go public. If they did survive past the Merovingian kings of France, then they've long gone into hiding.

The only problem with the above hypothesis, is that it requires more faith to believe that than the Bibles version of events. That's a whole lot of supposition there, with no evidence to back it up.

And what is the "divine seal of approval"? If there truly IS one, then the admission is that there is the divine. If there isn't one, there is nothing to lose, nor any reason to fear losing it.

Christians believe that the way the Bible is right now, is how God wanted it. The books that were left out were left out because that is the way He wanted it. The Bible was inspired by God, not written by Him with a literal pen and ink.

You mention that there is an "obvious" lie that is being told. May I ask what it is? And if it is such an obvious lie, why hasn't it been discovered?

Well, we could start with the whole "six days of creation". The dinosaurs would back me up on that, but they conveniently died out 65 million years ago. Ironically, I don't suspect that the church was involved.

There's really not a lot of evidence in the Bible either, which is why they call it "faith". All I'm supposing is that people and organizations will act in their own interest rather than in the interest of truth or goodness. You could find plenty of evidence of that in the last week alone.

By "Divine Seal of Approval", I mean the tacit authority that comes from being the "word of God". Every religion grants itself "holy authority". If another historical document, or God forbid science, should contradict the written word of God, then that history or science must be discredited at all costs. To allow doubt to creep into faith would be extremely damaging.

We could play this silly game all day, but it would only degenerate into insults and snide remarks, and that's not what this place is about. For all I know the Universe may actually have a Creator, but I'm not going to believe it just because somebody tells me to.

Just ask Galileo…

I find it ridiculous that it took until 1992 for the Roman Catholic Church to officially concede that the Earth does travel around the sun

I agree to an extent Jim.

Religion is a deeply personal journey. I just hope we can all respect the fact that each of us are entitled to the right to worship, or not worship, what we choose, whether it be God, man, science, or nothing. And all religions are guilty of ostracizing, and in some cases getting downright violent, with views that are counter to their beliefs. That is their right as much as it is my right to ignore their supposed truths. To each his own I guess.

I do think the Bible mentions dinosaurs, though the references are obscure at best.

Aah, but therein lies the rub…

Faith is the belief in something that you have little or no proof of, and it is the cornerstone of every form of worship. There is little or no real proof of God, Allah, or the Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva triumvirate of Hinduism, and in fact most of the scientific evidence contradicts the tenets of our established religions. Granted, we're a long ways from being able to prove how we and the rest of the Universe got here, but it doesn't look promising for old bearded guys in long flowing white robes in terms of direct pfoof. Yet billions of people have faith in them. It should be a personal thing, but in the areas where these religions are heavily practiced, a person faces everything from being a societal outcast to being beheaded if they don't publicly toe the company line. The best a person can hope for is to merely be harangued about going to hell.

The problem with faith is that it's a group mentality, in that an individual lack of faith in something is perceived as an attack on it's validity. That's why organized religion has such an issue with faith being a personal thing. It may be personal to you, but they want you to make it personal with everyone you meet. I don't mean that as an attack on Christianity, because Islam is far worse when it comes to "spreading the word". They actually believe that Allah will make the Earth a paradise again only if the entire world bends to the will of Allah. Talk about pushy…

I actually admire those Christians who resist the pressure to try converting me and just try to sell their faith by being great people. They realize that true faith is something that comes from within, in it's own due time, and not from peer pressure. People like that make me wish I had a little more faith.

Well, we could start with the whole "six days of creation". The dinosaurs would back me up on that, but they conveniently died out 65 million years ago. Ironically, I don't suspect that the church was involved.

There's really not a lot of evidence in the Bible either, which is why they call it "faith". All I'm supposing is that people and organizations will act in their own interest rather than in the interest of truth or goodness. You could find plenty of evidence of that in the last week alone.

By "Divine Seal of Approval", I mean the tacit authority that comes from being the "word of God". Every religion grants itself "holy authority". If another historical document, or God forbid science, should contradict the written word of God, then that history or science must be discredited at all costs. To allow doubt to creep into faith would be extremely damaging.

Just ask Galileo…

I find it ridiculous that it took until 1992 for the Roman Catholic Church to officially concede that the Earth does travel around the sun

You both are getting Christianity and the Catholic Church confused and assuming that they are same thing.

Also, dinosaurs do not disprove Genesis. I doubt that the generally illiterate masses of the Hebrew culture in the time period would easily grasp millions of years as opposed to days. More than likely the word "days" can be exchanged with the word "phases". Dinosaurs were not mentioned by name, but they also didn't exist when man was around. Only after man was "born" does Genesis talk about anything in detail. Anything before didn't matter did it? Why would man care about creatures that died long before? That defeats the whole point of the Genesis does it not?

Ironically, Jews, Christians, and Muslims are criticized for not being open minded towards atheists , however, atheists generally consider themselves "forward thinking" individuals and are closed minded to religions.

It wasn't necessarily the first form, but it quickly became the dominant form, as it took root in Rome, the world's dominant military power at the time. Papal edicts carried a lot more weight with a few legions to back them up.

well, according to Catholic beliefs they certainly were.

St. Peter was the first Pope, and he was with Jesus.

There was no Christianity before Jesus' died and

rose again.

How so? The Catholic Church is a form of Christianity. In fact it's the first form of Christianity.

For many hundreds of years, these were the exact same thing you understand.

It wasn't necessarily the first form, but it quickly became the dominant form, as it took root in Rome, the world's dominant military power at the time. Papal edicts carried a lot more weight with a few legions to back them up.

There have always been many denominations of Christianity. Just because one believes that they are the most right and were dominate does not mean that they are the actual religion. Religion is a personal thing really. Also, many have and still argue that the Catholic Church weren't right about a lot of things. This is why protestant movements started. But even before the Catholic Church there were other churches that were not Catholic Churches. As a matter of fact Catholicism came hundreds of years after.

Regardless of the situation, the Pope nor the Catholic Church represent Christians everywhere, and many do not even acknowledge the Pope as anything more than a devout person.