>>You may find this interesting (a thesis I think):
>>
>>http://www.dts.edu/about/news/the_missing_gospels

The whole concept of the gnostic gospels and the Nag Hammadi Texts is pretty interesting. The texts were actually discovered prior to the discovery of the dead sea scrolls. I suppose that because the content of the texts did not agree as well with standard church doctrine as the Catholic church would have liked, they didn't receive the sort of hype that the dead sea scrolls did. In fact, there were suggestions that they were suppressed to some extent. Not being on close terms with the Pope at that time, I can't comment. They were finally published, if memory serves, in the mid 1970s.

>>
>>Also, for the 1st three hundred years, christians believed in divine corporeality. Yet today christians generally believe God is incorporeal. Which is correct?
>
>I'm not sure their anthropomorphistic views of God are relevant. If you believe in God, then He is whatever He chooses. Corporeal when and if He chooses to be and incorporeal when and if He chooses otherwise. Why would any true believing Christian try to limit God's choices?
>
>>
>>>>Once again it is interpretation. Some scholars believe the bible infers that Jesus ascended into heaven bodily, and others believe he ascended but his physical body did not. You cannot take the text word for word since it has been overtranslated and even reworded in some versions. The text in the original version of the bible doesn't really say his 'physical body' in those words (according to the information from scholars in the last program I saw on it which was very interesting). Of course, they had scholars on with the opposing view as well. Hmmmmmm. Maybe that clarification is in the missing gospels?
>>>
>>>I can't say that I was "taught" it, but it has always been my understanding that Jesus' "spirit" was what ascended (even though the bible, somewhere, says to the effect "look ma, no body").
>>>
>>>But apparently one or more of the major Christian religions believes that He ascended bodily. So they'd have a bit of a problem on their hands if otherwise could be proven.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>I think they used the dna samples to determine whether the male and female in the tombs were related or not brother and sister or husband and wife. Also, I don't see how it disputes the resurrection since it could still have ocurred - only at a different location.
>>>>>
>>>>>If the DNA doesn't connect to Jesus, then all they've 'proved' is that two people who they postulate were Jesus and Mary (their translationsof the ossuaries, not everyone's) had a child. Also, if not brother and sister, then why necessarily 'husband and wife'? Because they had a child?
>>>>>
>>>>>If the resurrection is true, then there would be no bones belonging to Jesus to find, regardless where it may have happened. No? After resurrection he ascended, didn't he? Maybe I have it wrong, but I think, according to the gospels, he'd have ultimately left no body parts behind.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I agree. It is not possible to determine if it is accurate or not at this state. So far I have seen statisticians and scholars disagreeing. They found something, but what it is has not been adequately determined yet. Still, I think the show should be watched, then academic viewpoints weighed, and then debated before any conclusions are drawn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>They claimed to have DNA evidence. Compared to what. Am I to believe that somebody (the Vatican maybe) had Jesus' DNA lying around all this time in secret and brought it out for these guys to compare with? I can't watch it because I don't get the Discovery channel, but I'm willing to bet that it's going to end up being full of the kind of science that Erich von Daniken used. Start with an theory you'd like to be true, and then build on it to the point where nobody remembers to check the original premise. In the end it all sounds plausible, but is in reality, a castle built on sand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17345429/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Discovery Channel on March 4th. I saw an interview with them this morning on the am news.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It is very interesting (whether it is a truth or not). I saw a segment about this documentary on the Israeli news broadcast today.