Skip to comments.Tomb of St. Philip the Apostle discovered in Turkey's Denizli
Posted on 07/27/2011 6:39:32 AM PDT by marshmallow
D'Andria said the structure of the tomb and the writings on it proved that it belonged to St. Philip the Apostle, who is recognized as a martyr in the history of Christianity
The tomb of St. Philip the Apostle, one of the original 12 disciples of Christianity's central figure Jesus Christ, has been discovered during the ongoing excavations in Turkey's south-western province of Denizli.
Italian professor Francesco D'Andria, the head of the excavation team at the Hierapolis ancient city in Denizli, told reporters on Tuesday that experts had reached the tomb of St. Philip whose name is mentioned in the Bible as one of the 12 Apostles of Jesus.
Professor D'Andria said archeologists had been working for years to find the tomb of the Biblical figure, and finally, they had managed to reach the monument while working on the ruins of a newly-unearthed church in Hierapolis.
D'Andria said the structure of the tomb and the writings on it proved that it belonged to St. Philip the Apostle, who is recognized as a martyr in the history of Christianity.
Describing the discovery as a major development both for archeology and the Christian world, D'Andria said the tomb, which had not been opened yet, was expected to become an important Christian pilgrimage destination.
Hierapolis, whose name means "sacred city", is an ancient city located next to the renowned Pamukkale, white Travertine terraces, in Denizli province. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The city, famous for its historical hot springs used as a spa since the 2nd century, is a mixture of Pagan, Roman, Jewish and early Christian influences.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldbulletin.net ...
When will the Turks go back to central Asia and leave Anatolian Greece and Armenia to their rightful Christian inhabitants?
This is cool! Thanks for posting.
Oh please, DO NOT tell Geraldo!
How soon can we expect the Muzzies to destroy it?
Thanks for posting!
When the Christians outbreed and outfight them, of course. How do you think it got to be “Turkiye” in the first place?
Great discovery by the archaeologists and all credit to them in finding St. Philip’s tomb. St. Philip was a Jewish believer and not a Roman Catholic, but he is part of the universal pool of all believers and he is greatly honored for his apostleship and life service to Christ his Lord and our Lord. No one in the first century talked about being a Roman Catholic: its not in the words of the Bible.
...rhetorical point matched by rhetorical point.
I wonder what the writings are that supposedly prove this is the tomb of Phillip. Is there a carving “Here lies Phillip, follower of the Christ?
“When will the Turks go back to central Asia and leave Anatolian Greece and Armenia to their rightful Christian inhabitants?”
When is Jesus due back? It will be right around then.
Thank you for this post.
I’m not offering any opinion on what’s “rightful,” only on what is. Catawbas and Waxhaws could still be living here on my house lot in suburban Charlotte, NC, if they’d outbred and outfought people like me, 350 years ago.
And where in the article does it call him a "Roman Catholic"?
The term "Roman Catholic" does not appear in the Bible, but then neither does the word "Bible". And when Paul talks about "scripture", he isn't refering to the "New Testament" writings either.
The term "Roman Catholic" didn't appear until the great schism, so even "Roman Catholics" didn't refer to themselves as "Roman Catholics" for hundreds and hundreds of years.
So what is your point?
interesting news- thanks
St Philip Pray for us!
The expression ‘Roman Catholic’ is unique to English speaking countries and dates only to the early 17th century.
I think there was a study that showed that they are ethnically the same as the greeks and armenians
Likewise the Azerbaijanis are genetically and ethnically Irani though they speak a Turkic language.
It's interesting that "Turkey" became turkified by its Turkic elite while Bulgaria which had founders that had "Bulgar" Turkic blood, did not.
yes, neither is sola scriptura, or sole fide, etc, etc...
this namby pamby story telling that the church in the first century and thereafter was just nothing more than the ‘whole body of believers’ and not an actual hierarchial structure, centered in Rome, under Peter and his successors is just such an old, tired, rediculous ‘just so’ story, to deny the historicity of the catholic church.....
give it up already....
their rightful Christian inhabitants?
...we constantly hear about the “evil” crusaders, who “invaded” Muslim lands.
never about that Turkey was one of the cradles of early Christianity. Or that Egypt, and most of the middle east, was majority Christian, for CENTURIES.
...and only after hundreds of years of Muslim occuptation, murder, rape, forced conversions, did the Pope finally call for a crusade.
similarly, they throw out the “evil” Spanish inquistion. Yet Islam killed far more under their “enlightened” conquest and rule of Spain, for hundreds of years.
Jeez, couldn’t you have restrained yourself at until there was a thread that at least mentioned Roman Catholics?
You should direct your point to the Catholics: "the term Roman Catholic does not appear until the great schism, so Roman Catholics did not refer to themselves as Roman Catholics". By that same exact reasoning Roman Catholics cannot call first century Jewish followers of Christ and apostles of Christ as "Catholic" today.
Cannot the Catholics restrain from calling all the apostles “Catholic”?
No one in the first century talked about being a Roman Catholic: its not in the words of the Bible.
No one in the first century talked about ... the Bible.
it didn’t exist. so much for “sola scriptura”.
...there was ONE universal church.
(like in Ephesians)
and scripture talks about the importance of not letting false teachers and Satan divide it.
(tickle in the ear, Church of Timothy and Titus).
it was only referred to as Roman, after (Jew hating) Luther betrayed his oath to God, and split the church, and removed books from the Bible
(which condemns any who add OR remove even a single verse...)
Holy scripture also says some scripture is too hard to understand yourself, and you need (annointed) leaders to guide you.
scripture itself refers to a specific important scripture verse, that is NOT in the current Bible !
the Bible itself, refutes sola scriptura, in many ways.
The invention of a term to describe us by Anglicans in the 17th Century should restrain how we describe the Christians of the early church?
The term "Catholic" comes from the Greek "kata holon", "of the whole," or "universal". It's the church of the whole world, of the whole of humanity. The first recorded use of the term is in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch († AD 107), who called himself "the bishop of the Catholic Church in Syria".
Talk about defensive.
The article is a simple report of the discovery of a tomb. The archeologist claims it to be that of St. Philip. There is no mention of the Catholic Church.
What pushed your buttons? The fact that the archeologist is Italian?
Biblical - no, because you have foregone what the Lord Jesus Christ and His authority said and commissioned to the apostle Paul. Romans 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began.
Take ye heed what words Christ revealed to the apostle Paul and "my gospel" which Christ revealed to Paul to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ.
They will say its a muslim not phillip and claim the land as a holy site, then claim the body is a camel descendant of Mohamm...
Nobody in the first century talked about the Bible, either.
Some “Christian” YOU are....
Pick a fight, then blame the people you picked it with.
No wonder the pagans can’t help linking “Christian” with “hypocrite.”
I have never heard of anyone calling the original Apostles of Christ or even the later ones like Paul, Roman Catholic or even Catholic.
While you may find the term “one” Church in early writings it took a while for the term “universal” Church to become popular.
Early Christians from Jerusalem were definitely different than Christians of today. Many of their beliefs would seem strange to us. Many of us can’t even tithe, much less give all to the church. If we thought that we would be struck dead by not giving all we had to the church we would probably not have anything to do with that church.
Today we have learned men who go to seminaries and know much more about the scriptures than us plain folk could possibly understand. They have presented to us a Catechism and creed that we may not be able to fully understand but they assure us that with their higher understanding of scripture and ordinations that they are correct. When you mix the learning of man over centuries with what is left of scripture you come up with what we now have in the major Jewish and Christian religions of the day.
These learned men have fortunately been able to explain to us that even though it looks to us that certain practices like homosexuality and sex outside of marriage are forbidden in the scriptures in reality we misunderstand because of our lack of understanding and learning. That these practices and many others are OK because by declaring that we believe in Christ all things will be forgiven us and that sin is no longer possible once we have accepted Christ. To prove the acceptability of these practices they, our leaders practice them themselves and ordain others who do also.
Unfortunately there are many that will not listen to the reason of these learned men who over the centuries have compiled the doctrines of the “true” universal church we have today. These people who will not listen claim that through the “Spirit” they have found something that the wise and learned have missed and then start their own church based on this newly found doctrine. So now we have thousands of “Christian” denominations and sects that are at odds with the “Universal” Church.
I don’t understand why we can’t just let these learned, ordained seminarians do our thinking for us and just follow them.
Oh, sorry. I didn't realize you were one of the Biblical writers.
While we’re looking for dead saints God is looking for live ones.
Good article, but I must need more coffee: at first glance, I thought the professor’s name was Francisco D’Anconia.
When I was a overnight driver I befriend a Indian christian whose Church traces back to St Thomas. St Thomas the apostle went to India to establish Churches. This grew through out history. It is still in existence.
Tradition reads the apostle Thomas was speared to death by lancers on horse. My new friend told me. So I looked it up. It was fascinating. They celebrate the eucharist like Catholics.
This has been preserved from history for two thousand years.
History of Christian Martyrs to the First General Persecutions
Christ our Savior, in the Gospel of St. Matthew, hearing the confession of Simon Peter, who, first of all other, openly acknowledged Him to be the Son of God, and perceiving the secret hand of His Father therein, called him (alluding to his name) a rock, upon which rock He would build His Church so strong that the gates of hell should not prevail against it. In which words three things are to be noted: First, that Christ will have a Church in this world. Secondly, that the same Church should mightily be impugned, not only by the world, but also by the uttermost strength and powers of all hell. And, thirdly, that the same Church, notwithstanding the uttermost of the devil and all his malice, should continue.
Which prophecy of Christ we see wonderfully to be verified, insomuch that the whole course of the Church to this day may seem nothing else but a verifying of the said prophecy. First, that Christ hath set up a Church, needeth no declaration. Secondly, what force of princes, kings, monarchs, governors, and rulers of this world, with their subjects, publicly and privately, with all their strength and cunning, have bent themselves against this Church! And, thirdly, how the said Church, all this notwithstanding, hath yet endured and holden its own! What storms and tempests it hath overpast, wondrous it is to behold: for the more evident declaration whereof, I have addressed this present history, to the end, first, that the wonderful works of God in His Church might appear to His glory; also that, the continuance and proceedings of the Church, from time to time, being set forth, more knowledge and experience may redound thereby, to the profit of the reader and edification of Christian faith.
As it is not our business to enlarge upon our Savior’s history, either before or after His crucifixion, we shall only find it necessary to remind our readers of the discomfiture of the Jews by His subsequent resurrection. Although one apostle had betrayed Him; although another had denied Him, under the solemn sanction of an oath; and although the rest had forsaken Him, unless we may except “the disciple who was known unto the high-priest”; the history of His resurrection gave a new direction to all their hearts, and, after the mission of the Holy Spirit, imparted new confidence to their minds. The powers with which they were endued emboldened them to proclaim His name, to the confusion of the Jewish rulers, and the astonishment of Gentile proselytes.
I. St. Stephen
St. Stephen suffered the next in order. His death was occasioned by the faithful manner in which he preached the Gospel to the betrayers and murderers of Christ. To such a degree of madness were they excited, that they cast him out of the city and stoned him to death. The time when he suffered is generally supposed to have been at the passover which succeeded to that of our Lord’s crucifixion, and to the era of his ascension, in the following spring.
Upon this a great persecution was raised against all who professed their belief in Christ as the Messiah, or as a prophet. We are immediately told by St. Luke, that “there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem;” and that “they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.”
About two thousand Christians, with Nicanor, one of the seven deacons, suffered martyrdom during the “persecution that arose about Stephen.”
II. James the Great
The next martyr we meet with, according to St. Luke, in the History of the Apsotles’ Acts, was James the son of Zebedee, the elder brother of John, and a relative of our Lord; for his mother Salome was cousin-german to the Virgin Mary. It was not until ten years after the death of Stephen that the second martyrdom took place; for no sooner had Herod Agrippa been appointed governor of Judea, than, with a view to ingratiate himself with them, he raised a sharp persecution against the Christians, and determined to make an effectual blow, by striking at their leaders. The account given us by an eminent primitive writer, Clemens Alexandrinus, ought not to be overlooked; that, as James was led to the place of martyrdom, his accuser was brought to repent of his conduct by the apostle’s extraordinary courage and undauntedness, and fell down at his feet to request his pardon, professing himself a Christian, and resolving that James should not receive the crown of martyrdom alone. Hence they were both beheaded at the same time. Thus did the first apostolic martyr cheerfully and resolutely receive that cup, which he had told our Savior he was ready to drink. Timon and Parmenas suffered martyrdom about the same time; the one at Philippi, and the other in Macedonia. These events took place A.D. 44.
Was born at Bethsaida, in Galilee and was first called by the name of “disciple.” He labored diligently in Upper Asia, and suffered martyrdom at Heliopolis, in Phrygia. He was scourged, thrown into prison, and afterwards crucified, A.D. 54.
Whose occupation was that of a toll-gatherer, was born at Nazareth. He wrote his gospel in Hebrew, which was afterwards translated into Greek by James the Less. The scene of his labors was Parthia, and Ethiopia, in which latter country he suffered martyrdom, being slain with a halberd in the city of Nadabah, A.D. 60.
V. James the Less
Is supposed by some to have been the brother of our Lord, by a former wife of Joseph. This is very doubtful, and accords too much with the Catholic superstition, that Mary never had any other children except our Savior. He was elected to the oversight of the churches of Jerusalem; and was the author of the Epistle ascribed to James in the sacred canon. At the age of ninety-four he was beat and stoned by the Jews; and finally had his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club.
Of whom less is known than of most of the other disciples, was elected to fill the vacant place of Judas. He was stoned at Jerusalem and then beheaded.
Was the brother of Peter. He preached the gospel to many Asiatic nations; but on his arrival at Edessa he was taken and crucified on a cross, the two ends of which were fixed transversely in the ground. Hence the derivation of the term, St. Andrew’s Cross.
VIII. St. Mark
Was born of Jewish parents of the tribe of Levi. He is supposed to have been converted to Christianity by Peter, whom he served as an amanuensis, and under whose inspection he wrote his Gospel in the Greek language. Mark was dragged to pieces by the people of Alexandria, at the great solemnity of Serapis their idol, ending his life under their merciless hands.
Among many other saints, the blessed apostle Peter was condemned to death, and crucified, as some do write, at Rome; albeit some others, and not without cause, do doubt thereof. Hegesippus saith that Nero sought matter against Peter to put him to death; which, when the people perceived, they entreated Peter with much ado that he would fly the city. Peter, through their importunity at length persuaded, prepared himself to avoid. But, coming to the gate, he saw the Lord Christ come to meet him, to whom he, worshipping, said, “Lord, whither dost Thou go?” To whom He answered and said, “I am come again to be crucified.” By this, Peter, perceiving his suffering to be understood, returned into the city. Jerome saith that he was crucified, his head being down and his feet upward, himself so requiring, because he was (he said) unworthy to be crucified after the same form and manner as the Lord was.
Paul, the apostle, who before was called Saul, after his great travail and unspeakable labors in promoting the Gospel of Christ, suffered also in this first persecution under Nero. Abdias, declareth that under his execution Nero sent two of his esquires, Ferega and Parthemius, to bring him word of his death. They, coming to Paul instructing the people, desired him to pray for them, that they might believe; who told them that shortly after they should believe and be baptised at His sepulcher. This done, the soldiers came and led him out of the city to the place of execution, where he, after his prayers made, gave his neck to the sword.
The brother of James, was commonly called Thaddeus. He was crucified at Edessa, A.D. 72.
Preached in several countries, and having translated the Gospel of Matthew into the language of India, he propagated it in that country. He was at length cruelly beaten and then crucified by the impatient idolaters.
Called Didymus, preached the Gospel in Parthia and India, where exciting the rage of the pagan priests, he was martyred by being thrust through with a spear.
The evangelist, was the author of the Gospel which goes under his name. He travelled with Paul through various countries, and is supposed to have been hanged on an olive tree, by the idolatrous priests of Greece.
Surnamed Zelotes, preached the Gospel in Mauritania, Africa, and even in Britain, in which latter country he was crucified, A.D. 74.
The “beloved disciple,” was brother to James the Great. The churches of Smyrna, Pergamos, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea, and Thyatira, were founded by him. From Ephesus he was ordered to be sent to Rome, where it is affirmed he was cast into a cauldron of boiling oil. He escaped by miracle, without injury. Domitian afterwards banished him to the Isle of Patmos, where he wrote the Book of Revelation. Nerva, the successor of Domitian, recalled him. He was the only apostle who escaped a violent death.
Was of Cyprus, but of Jewish descent, his death is supposed to have taken place about A.D. 73.
And yet, notwithstanding all these continual persecutions and horrible punishments, the Church daily increased, deeply rooted in the doctrine of the apostles and of men apostolical, and watered plentously with the blood of saints.
No doubt there is plenty of mixed blood - that always follows this kind of conquest - but they are still a distinct ethnic group, and no self-respecting Greek or Armenian would claim ethnic commonality, either as a matter of genetics or of character.
A. your ``No one in the first century talked about being a Roman Catholic``.
So you have heard every word that was spoken from the year 3 B.C. until the year 99 A.D.
Give me a break!
But you did hit the nail on the head.
There was an oral tradition from A.D. 33 and before from many sources:
1) the followers of John the Baptist still in Iraq and St. Mark in Egypt
2) the oral traditions of the 12 Apostles in India, Ethiopia, Spain etc. until St. Paul`s first epistle in 50`s?.
Thus there is almost 20 years of talking by the disciples, apostles and others which wasn`t written down-
This is called the oral tradition of the Church, i.e., the Magisterium, the oral teaching of the Church, because Christ taught orally to his apostles and disciples, and the early Church followed his example.
Ergo you assumption A. above cannot be proven.
But the first catechism was written down before much of the New Testament was written down.
Thus the Church existed in ROME in the first century and even before that existed in the Holy Land: `Matthew 16: 18 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. ...`
[I wonder where St. Peter was?]
He was in ROME.
`Taken in the sense of “the act of teaching” and “the knowledge imparted by teaching”, this term is synonymous with CATECHESIS and CATECHISM. Didaskalia, didache, in the Vulgate, doctrina, are often used in the New Testament, especially in the Pastoral Epistles. As we might expect, the Apostle insists upon “doctrine” as one of the most important duties of a bishop (1 Timothy 4:13, 16; 5:17; 2 Timothy 4:2, etc.).
The word katechesis means instruction by word of mouth, especially by questioning and answering. Though it may apply to any subject-matter, it is commonly used for instruction in the elements of religion, especially preparation for initiation into Christianity. The word and others of the same origin occur in St. Luke’s Gospel: “That thou mayest know the verity of those things in which thou hast been instructed” (katechethes, in quibus eruditus es i, 4). In Acts 18:25, Apollo is described as “instructed [katechemenos, edoctus] in the way of the Lord”. St. Paul uses the word twice: “I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct [katecheso, instruam] others also” (1 Corinthians 14:19); and “Let him that is instructed [ho katechoumenos, is qui catechizatur] in the word, communicate to him that instructeth [to katechounti, ei qui catechizat] him, in all good things” (Galatians 6:6). Hence the word, with its technical meaning of oral religious instruction, passed into ecclesiastical use, and is applied both to the act of instructing and the subject-matter of the instruction.`` newadvent.org
Again: A. your ``No one in the first century talked about being a Roman Catholic``.
It`s as if one would claim that there was no US government until the capitol was built in Washington DC because no one was calling themselves Washingtonics during the first years of the USA.
Your example limps.
While forgetting that Islam was not around until the 600’s.
Maybe because the live ones fail to live up to their calling by God to become saints.
That book took info from Catholic sources then made half truths mixed with lies. All scholars refute that book not being true. But so called Christian bookstores in their prejudice still stock the lies.
Thanks marshmallow,Will have to do a little research on him.
I like how you narrowed it down to the 1st century... interesting. I assume you’ve read the student of John (the apostle), called Ignatius of Antioch (writing around 107-110 AD)? His letter to the Smyrneans re: docetists If not, if I give you a link, will you read it?
If you need it in Greek or with commentaries from Lightfoot and others, let me know. There are also his other letters you may want to check out as well. You may run across Justin Martyr, Cyril of Jerusalem and others along the way.
Mail me when you get a chance.
Pride is a killer, I know. Pray for me as I pray for you.