Skip to comments.
ANCIENT NECROPOLIS FOUND BENEATH VATICAN
Yahoo News ^
| October 9, 2006
Posted on 10/09/2006 9:03:15 AM PDT by NYer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
To: Mike Fieschko
Thanks for the info about the necropolis....didn't know this was a new one.
21
posted on
10/09/2006 12:17:16 PM PDT
by
Claud
To: Dominick; donmeaker
Indeed...but the Resurrection, though historical, is not the easiest thing for a skeptic to grasp. And my goal here is not so much to refute his point but to help him to see some problems with his own conclusions in this regard.
22
posted on
10/09/2006 12:27:15 PM PDT
by
Claud
To: NYer
One is reminded that, as Douglas MacArthur put it, we are a people of ancient and honorable descent.
23
posted on
10/09/2006 12:54:25 PM PDT
by
Iris7
(Dare to be pigheaded! Stubborn! "Tolerance" is not a virtue!)
To: Remole
24
posted on
10/09/2006 1:25:19 PM PDT
by
Remole
To: NYer; Dr. Eckleburg
Why seek ye the living among the dead?(Lk.24:5)
25
posted on
10/09/2006 1:46:13 PM PDT
by
fortheDeclaration
(Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
To: donmeaker
You may be invincibly ignorant. Put down
The DaVinci Code and back away, slowly.
There are many, many contemporaneous Christian writers from the first and second centuries A.D. who mention St. Peter as Bishop of Rome and head of the Church.
In order to believe that nonsensical geocities website, you have to ignore ALL the historical evidence (and there is plenty.)
26
posted on
10/09/2006 2:01:54 PM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
To: Claud
27
posted on
10/09/2006 2:02:30 PM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
To: Mike Fieschko
Good question! I tried to figure that out before I read further down the thread.
According to this account in La Stampa via an italian blog site, it's located " alledificio dellAnnona vaticana e accanto alla fontana della Galea - si estendeva lungo le pendici della collina al lato della Via Triumphalis."
I think Galea is a typo there & it's really the Fontana de Galera, or Fountain of the Sailing Ship (#17 on your map). The reference to the 'edificio dell'Annona' kinda throws me off though. It's not on vatican maps (Annonas are like ancient roman granaries, usually associated with municipal financial administration). I know that the Vatican Printing office bldg (#30 on your map) is sometimes referred to as "Spazzo Annonari". But the ancient Via Triumphalis (a short section of which is still called the Via Trionfale in modern Rome) that La Stampa refers to would probably extend over closer to the fountain.
My mom, who has spent a lot more time than I inside the walls of the Vatican & who has molto bene contacts there, thinks she heard it was way over by the vaticano railway station though. Sorry, I don't think she's right. I vote for this area right below (just SE of) the fountain where all the dusty white stuff is just inside the walls shown here on google maps.
Fontana della Galera
28
posted on
10/09/2006 2:05:08 PM PDT
by
leilani
(Dimmi, dimmi se mai fu fatta cosa alcuna!)
To: leilani
Thanks. I figured there would be someone on FR familiar enough with what's inside the Vatican City walls, to make an educated guess.
To: Mike Fieschko
Eek! LOL. Not an educated guess, just a shot in the dark, and I fully expect to be proven wrong when they finally get around to telling us exactly where the new garage is.
30
posted on
10/09/2006 2:21:22 PM PDT
by
leilani
(Dimmi, dimmi se mai fu fatta cosa alcuna!)
To: AnAmericanMother
No, I think you beat me!
PETROS ENI
:)
31
posted on
10/09/2006 2:34:29 PM PDT
by
Claud
To: NYer
Cool. Read about this in "Biblical Archeology".
32
posted on
10/09/2006 3:55:40 PM PDT
by
redgolum
("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
To: NYer
33
posted on
10/09/2006 4:26:31 PM PDT
by
Dustbunny
(The BIBLE - Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth)
To: NYer; SunkenCiv
34
posted on
10/09/2006 5:31:23 PM PDT
by
kstewskis
("Tolerance is what happens when one loses their principles..." Fr. A. Saenz)
To: AnAmericanMother
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/christian-history.html
I just went through the above site: It confirmed my memory of my courses at Evangel College:
None of the First Century writers mentioned Peter as bishop of Rome. The mentions of him were either quotes from the gospel, or allusions to Peter as an apostle.
35
posted on
10/09/2006 5:36:19 PM PDT
by
donmeaker
(If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
To: NYer
No surprise. The reason St. Peter's is located on the Vatican hill is because St. Peter was buried there. They actually found what are believed to be his remains buried in a spot which had a graffito which read "Peter is here" carved over top of it some 20 years ago.
36
posted on
10/09/2006 5:51:52 PM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: donmeaker
I rather think that Peter was a myth.
Personally I think that Julius Caesar was a myth. Makes about as much sense as your statement.
37
posted on
10/09/2006 5:54:01 PM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: donmeaker
Constantinius had reasons for moving his capital away from Rome, the Romans being part of that.
Make that NO part of it. Constantine took many of the oldest Roman families with him to Byzantium. He moved the capital to Byzantium for military and economic reason, not religious ones. Rome was extremely difficult to defend absent a large army and was not a port city which made reprovisioning it very difficult in the event of a siege. Furthermore, it was far distant from the major theaters of conflict at the time, which were Persia and the Rhine/Danube frontier. Thus, the eastern Roman capital became Byzantium, and the Western Roman capital eventually became Ravenna.
38
posted on
10/09/2006 5:57:45 PM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
To: donmeaker
I'm sorry, but your source is misinformed. Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Eusebius, Irenaeus, all refer repeatedly to the primacy of Peter and of the See of Rome, within 50-100 years after the Resurrection.
. . . BTW, you keep changing the criteria - moving the target. You are the one who started with the 4th century, now you're down to the first century A.D. . . Our Saviour's death and resurrection didn't occur until half way through that century. That tells me you lack confidence in your sources . . . and that lack of confidence is well founded.
39
posted on
10/09/2006 6:48:43 PM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
To: Mike Fieschko; leilani
I wish I were familiar enough with what's inside the Vatican City walls to make an educated guess!! *sigh*
40
posted on
10/09/2006 6:52:51 PM PDT
by
samiam1972
(Live simply so that others may simply live!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson