Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 06-28-2009, 07:20 PM

Quote:

[Pope] Benedict said archaeologists recently unearthed and opened the white marble sarcophagus located under the Basilica of St. Paul's Outside the Walls in Rome, which for some 2,000 years has been believed by the faithful to be the tomb of St. Paul.

Benedict said scientists had conducted carbon dating tests on bone fragments found inside the sarcophagus and confirmed that they date from the first or second century.

"This seems to confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that they are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul," Benedict said, announcing the findings at a service in the basilica to mark the end of the Vatican's Paoline year, in honor of the apostle.

Are news reporters unable or unwilling to point out obvious absurdities in Vatican pronouncements?

Another serious story

Quote:

With “great emotion” Benedict XVI announced that a recent scientific probe confirmed what Catholic tradition has always held, namely that the body of the Apostle Paul is located under the papal altar in the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls. . . .

The Pontiff said that recently the tomb was "subject to a scientific investigation. A small hole was drilled in the sarcophagus, unopened for centuries, and a probe was introduced. It found traces of a valuable purple fabric, in linen and gold layer-laminated, and a blue fabric with linen threads. Red incense grains and substances containing proteins and limestone were also discovered. Small fragments of bone were found and radiocarbon dated by experts who did not know their place of origin. Results indicate that they belong to someone who lived between the 1st and 2nd century A.D. This seems to confirm the unanimous and undisputed tradition according to which these are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul. All this fills our soul with deep emotion."

The Pope went on to condemn divorce, drugs, and thinking for oneself.

There was no discussion of why Paul would have been buried with expensive cloth usually reserved for the nobility.

Reuters

Quote:

The discovery of the bone fragments coincided with news that Vatican archaeologists had discovered what they believe is the oldest image in existence of St Paul, dating from the late 4th century, on the walls of catacomb beneath Rome.

. . .

Experts of the Ponitifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology made the discovery on June 19 in the Catacomb of Santa Tecla in Rome and described it as the "oldest icon in history dedicated to the cult of the Apostle", according to the Vatican newspaper.

Joan of Bark · 06-28-2009, 07:41 PM

Quote:

they belong to someone who lived between the 1st and 2nd century A.D.

Wow! How old was Paul when he finally kicked off?

aa5874 · 06-28-2009, 07:50 PM

I think millions of people lived between the 1st and 2nd century and hundreds of thousands died during the same time.

Thor Q. Mada · 06-28-2009, 08:03 PM

Strange that the church always believes scientific methods when it can be used as a confirmation of their stories. Think about the shroud of Turin.

mountainman · 06-28-2009, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Pope went on to condemn .... thinking for oneself.

"Plato's critical questioning
is a menace to the state"

--- Oration at Antioch, c.324 CE

Toto · 06-28-2009, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

I think millions of people lived between the 1st and 2nd century and hundreds of thousands died during the same time.

Think about it. Just think.

Thor Q. Mada · 06-28-2009, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

I think millions of people lived between the 1st and 2nd century and hundreds of thousands died during the same time.

Correction: they all died during the same time.

Steven Carr · 06-28-2009, 11:42 PM

'It found traces of a valuable purple fabric, in linen and gold layer-laminated, and a blue fabric with linen threads'

Remarkable detail about what Paul was buried in. The Pope is clearly interested in Paul.

And who can blame him? After all, you would expect a leading religious person to be interested in the minute details of one of his heroes.

Of course, Paul himself was not interested in conveying the trvial details of Jesus death, such as where it was, or anything Jesus might have said as his last words, or that Jesus was deserted by the so-called pillars, or the curtain of the Temple being ripped.

Or that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, fulfilling prophecy.

Or that Jesus was born of a virgin.

etc

Diogenes the Cynic · 06-29-2009, 12:21 AM

Although Benedict calling the tradition "confirmed" is clearly over the top, it at least sounds like it wasn't outright falsified by the test.

2-J · 06-29-2009, 02:29 AM

This is as bogus as the shameful St.Peter's bones 'confirmation' thing (on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter's_tomb )

The best we can ever do is trace such remains to the 3rd-4th centuries. The possibility for fraud at that point in history was immense.

With St.Peter's bones, there is a good argument that Constantine and the early church did indeed believe (or it was convenient for them to say) that St Peter was buried at that spot (half of vatican hill was levelled to build the original basillica over that spot) and a 1st century cemetary and graves are located beneath St.Peter's. But there is no real evidence against the tradition itself, respected by Constantine, being a fraud.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-28-2009, 07:50 PM	#3
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	I think millions of people lived between the 1st and 2nd century and hundreds of thousands died during the same time.

06-28-2009, 08:03 PM	#4
Thor Q. Mada Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Asia Posts: 3,558	Strange that the church always believes scientific methods when it can be used as a confirmation of their stories. Think about the shroud of Turin.

06-28-2009, 11:42 PM	#8
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	'It found traces of a valuable purple fabric, in linen and gold layer-laminated, and a blue fabric with linen threads' Remarkable detail about what Paul was buried in. The Pope is clearly interested in Paul. And who can blame him? After all, you would expect a leading religious person to be interested in the minute details of one of his heroes. Of course, Paul himself was not interested in conveying the trvial details of Jesus death, such as where it was, or anything Jesus might have said as his last words, or that Jesus was deserted by the so-called pillars, or the curtain of the Temple being ripped. Or that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, fulfilling prophecy. Or that Jesus was born of a virgin. etc

06-29-2009, 12:21 AM	#9
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Although Benedict calling the tradition "confirmed" is clearly over the top, it at least sounds like it wasn't outright falsified by the test.

06-29-2009, 02:29 AM	#10
2-J Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: UK Posts: 179	This is as bogus as the shameful St.Peter's bones 'confirmation' thing (on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter's_tomb ) The best we can ever do is trace such remains to the 3rd-4th centuries. The possibility for fraud at that point in history was immense. With St.Peter's bones, there is a good argument that Constantine and the early church did indeed believe (or it was convenient for them to say) that St Peter was buried at that spot (half of vatican hill was levelled to build the original basillica over that spot) and a 1st century cemetary and graves are located beneath St.Peter's. But there is no real evidence against the tradition itself, respected by Constantine, being a fraud.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.