Bones of John The Baptist Possibly Discovered

ABC News Online ^ | June 16, 2012 | Russell Goldman

[Aliska]

A team of researchers believe a knuckle bone found buried beneath a Bulgarian church may belong to John the Baptist, the New Testament prophet who heralded the ministry of Jesus.

(Photo Included in article)

[Aliska]

I thought this was hopeful but didn't know relics were honored that early. I don't have anything to add to the discussion but thought it worth posting, was hoping somebody would, think not.

[Aliska]

ping also the Catholic list. I can’t think offhand Protestant FReepers but think they’d be interested, too.

[GreyFriar]

The British “Daily Mail” had this story 3-4 days ago. I consider it interesting speculation only.

[Boogieman]

There’s no reason to assume that this means relics were honored that early. The Crusaders dug up plenty of stuff centuries later and shipped it back to Europe.

[madison10]

If the head is still intact we know that the bones discovered are NOT those of John the Baptist. How can they tell from just a knuckle bone?

[Boogieman]

They can’t, strictly speaking. There’s circumstantial evidence and tradition that associate it with John, and when they tested them, they dated to the 1st century.

[skeeter]

Sweaty Ivan is Bulgarian for John the Baptist?

[donmeaker]

I have nothing to add to the subject of relics that wasn’t said better by Geoffry Chaucer in his “Pardoner’s Tale”.

“He had a cross of latten set with stones,
And in a glass a handful of pig`s bones.
But with these relics when he had in hand
Some humble parson dwelling in the land,
In one day he could get more revenue
Than would the parson in a month or two.”

[Aliska]

First I'd heard of it, I don't assume it's true but neither do I assume it's not true. I thought about if they find a head . .. .but well it's grisly but maybe they got the whole body back for burial. We aren't told.

Could be another hoax. But if not, If Elizabeth was Mary's 1st cousin (not sure about that either), then Jesus and John would have been first cousins once removed.

[Aliska]

First I'd heard of it, I don't assume it's true but neither do I assume it's not true. I thought about if they find a head . .. .but well it's grisly but maybe they got the whole body back for burial. We aren't told.

Could be another hoax. But if not, If Elizabeth was Mary's 1st cousin (not sure about that either), then Jesus and John would have been first cousins once removed.

[Aliska]

Sorry for the double post following yours. I’m familiar with that but if sound testing and science was used they would at least know if they were human bones. The dates checked out as did the location. But I’m ever the skeptic.

[jagusafr]

I’m sorry - why is this important to any Christian? Does it make any more or less true Christ’s death and resurrection?

[kabumpo]

No, the children of first cousins are second cousins. The first cousins once removed are Elizabeth and Jesus; Mary and John.

[Aliska]

Does it make any more or less true Christ’s death and resurrection?

No.

[editor-surveyor]

Seriously, how can they build such an elaborate theory on a knuckle bone?

Its almost as bad as the evolutionistas inventing an “ape man” from a pig’s tooth.

[Aliska]

You are correct. I should have thought of that because one of my second cousins I'm more aware than with other second cousins that his father and my father were first cousins.

I'd just always thought for no particular reason that John and Jesus were first cousins then realized that couldn't be and got it wrong. Thanks for the correction.

[Aliska]

Well if they'd dug it up out of the dirt I'd think the same. But it was in some kind of box with the engraving. Which could be another hoax of course. And I sure didn't know the route of any bones being transferred, especially to Bulgaria.

Sigh. I don't like the analogy to pig's tooth because they tested the dna and would know it's a good probability that they are human bones.

[A.A. Cunningham]

"And Moses took Joseph's bones with him: because he had adjured the children of Israel, saying: God shall visit you, carry out my bones from hence with you." Exodus 13:19

"And when he was come home he took a sword, and divided the dead body of his wife with her bones into twelve parts, and sent the pieces into all the borders of Israel. And when every one had seen this, they all cried out: There was never such a thing done in Israel from the day that our fathers came up out of Egypt, until this day: give sentence, and decree in common what ought to be done." Judges 19:29-30

"And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and cast the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched the bones of Eliseus, the man came to life, and stood upon his feet." 4 Kings 13:21

[Aliska]

I was reminded of those verses when I looked it up on yt and found one by pastor with surname of Begley. So relics (bones) were almost sacred (I don't think we are to worship them but venerate them).

My reaction on seeing the photo was sadness that they were in such poor condition. Also read elsewhere that the bones were found outside the box. Also another site I'm not familiar with said there were a few more bones, an ulna, tooth, piece of er cranium, and that they all tested as belonging to the same man.

Doesn't prove they belonged to John the Baptist but doesn't prove they don't. The pastor suggested they could be a harbinger of the soon coming of Christ just as John the Baptist was a harbinger of the man Jesus Christ who was about to embark upon his mission.

I guess I like to believe something is true then give it some time. Often I find I've been wrong but if serious red flags don't go up, try to keep an open mind. With God all things are possible.

[JimSEA]

As I understand, they got and processed DNA from the bones and determined the age of the bones. The result was that the bones were those of a Mideastern man who died in the first century. The next step is to try and test other bones supposedly belonging to John the Baptist (of which there are many). Should he get a match he can claim the bones are likely those of John. There is no known means of positive proof at this day and age.