Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remains of Apostle Paul May Have Been Found
Associated Press (excerpt) ^ | December 6, 2006

Posted on 12/06/2006 4:29:58 PM PST by HAL9000

Excerpt -

ROME (AP) - Vatican archaeologists have unearthed a sarcophagus believed to contain the remains of the Apostle Paul that had been buried beneath Rome's second largest basilica.

The sarcophagus, which dates back to at least A.D. 390, has been the subject of an extended excavation that began in 2002 and was completed last month, the project's head said this week.

~ snip ~


(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: apostle; apostlepaul; archaeology; catholic; christianity; godsgravesglyphs; paul; relics; rome; saintpaul; stpaul; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-409 next last
To: FreedomCalls
You will find no scripture supporting the sinlessness and assumption of Mary (as most likely you know).
101 posted on 12/06/2006 8:05:31 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
The heavenly resurrected body is your present body, only glorified. They are not two numerically distinct bodies, but one and the same body, simply clothed with immortality.

That's the belief system of the ancient Egyptian religion of Isis, Osirus, and Horus -- nothing to do with Christianity.

102 posted on 12/06/2006 8:08:01 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
I am dating my self

You should really try dating other people, now and then.

For Sure, you could get in touch with your inner woman and end up with and inner child. Then you'll have REALLY screwed yourself.

103 posted on 12/06/2006 8:10:48 PM PST by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
What scripture is there to support that assertation?

There isn't any. It is a Catholic belief.

Just Google "mary assumption scripture" and you will have plenty of information.

104 posted on 12/06/2006 8:11:36 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
That's is part of orthodox Christianity. The two opposite errors are materialism (denial of the soul), and Platonism (also called 'angelism'), which is the denial that our bodies are actual parts of us.

-A8

105 posted on 12/06/2006 8:11:42 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Pls see #104.


106 posted on 12/06/2006 8:12:49 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
What scripture is there to support that assertation?

There is no Scripture supporting your assumption that all theology be taught formally in Scripture.

-A8

107 posted on 12/06/2006 8:14:17 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
This doctrine of the bodily Assumption of Mary (called the Dormition in the ancient Eastern Christian Church)--- is, like the Bible itself, part of what the Apostles handed down to the Church.

Anyone engaging Catholics or Orthodox on these threads should realize that "where is that in Scripture?" is not the trump card in thes discussions. Keep in mind that neither the original Church nor the Bible itself teaches that the Bible is the sole rule of faith.

The Bible denies that it is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

108 posted on 12/06/2006 8:15:23 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o (Stand firm and hold to the Traditions--- because the Bible tells me so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Would God have chosen someone unsuitable to be the mother of His Son? We know that Jesus revered His Mother, and Jesus, being the Second Person of the Trinity is part of God, so I'd assume that yes, God revered Mary as well. That doesn't mean that Mary is equal with God, but it does mean that we should revere her, above all other human beings, except for Jesus.


109 posted on 12/06/2006 8:18:52 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
Which part of scripture is this from? I remember my Catholic roommate talking about this, but never new exactly where it came from.

And I mean this as a respectful question.

BTW, I was just at the Vatican two weeks ago. Amazing.
110 posted on 12/06/2006 8:23:20 PM PST by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: what's up; SuziQ
"Surely Catholics would not actually say God REVERED (venerated) Mary?"

Well, consider this: Jesus is God, co-equal with the Father. (I think all Christians would defend that statement.)

And Jesus honored Mary. Because Mary was His mother,and the Commandments say "Honor thy father and thy mother."

He certainly didn't worship and adore her, because He is God she is human; a disciple; in her own words, a handmaid.

So: "revere" in the sense of "adore"? No. "Revere" in the sense of "honor"? Yes.

111 posted on 12/06/2006 8:23:31 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o ("Stand firm and hold to the Traditions"--- 2 Thess. 2:15--- because the Bible tells me so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
There is no Scripture supporting your assumption that all theology be taught formally in Scripture.

"Sola Scriptura" - it is the fundamental basis of Protestant faith.

Proverbs 30:5-6
(5) Every word of God is pure;
He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
(6) Do not add to His words,
Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

112 posted on 12/06/2006 8:26:45 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Save me a bone, I need a good luck charm.


113 posted on 12/06/2006 8:27:11 PM PST by Ciexyz (Satisfied owner of a 2007 Toyota Corolla.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

Here you go, you might learn something.

http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/maryc3.htm


114 posted on 12/06/2006 8:30:23 PM PST by khnyny (God Bless the Republic for which it stands)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Dead Dog
See 102.
115 posted on 12/06/2006 8:32:42 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
Would God have chosen someone unsuitable to be the mother of His Son?

God chooses whom He wills. It may not seem "logical" but there you go. God knows better than us.

Some would have considered, for example, that David was unsuitable to carry the line of Christ since he was guilty of adultery and murder. Yet God chose him. David praised God for bestowing grace on him despite his sin; Mary did the same.

116 posted on 12/06/2006 8:35:08 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

? accelerated decay??:)


117 posted on 12/06/2006 8:37:28 PM PST by coincheck (Pray for my Brother, he just went to Iraq.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
The Catholic Church completely affirms that verse, and every verse in the Bible, a Bible which Protestants got from the Catholic Church. But that verse does not teach 'sola scriptura'. We do not add to His words. We simply recognize that many of His words were not written down in Scripture; they were passed down orally from the Apostles to the bishops.

-A8

118 posted on 12/06/2006 8:41:22 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Mary did the same.

How do you know?

-A8

119 posted on 12/06/2006 8:42:24 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Well, since the Apostles knew her personally, and the youngest one took her in as his Mother when Jesus died, I will defer to THEIR teachings on the matter. They may not have written an Epistle or a letter to one of the outlying communities to that effect, but it was an accepted teaching in the first century of Christianity, and is one of those traditions on which our Faith was founded.


120 posted on 12/06/2006 8:47:38 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
Luke 1:46-47 is fairly clear though there is much, much less text devoted to Mary than David in the Bible as you probably well know.

Mary rejoices in God her Savior. She acknowledges that she needed to be saved from sin.

121 posted on 12/06/2006 8:48:34 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: what's up
I am not asking you whether she had a Savior; even babies have a Savior in Christ. I am asking you how you know she committed sins.

-A8

122 posted on 12/06/2006 8:51:01 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
Apostles knew her personally, and the youngest one took her in as his Mother when Jesus died, I will defer to THEIR teachings on the matter

That is always a good practice but if you're going to be honest about that you will have to acknowledge that they did not teach that Mary was sinless or was assumed into Heaven.

123 posted on 12/06/2006 8:51:18 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
I am asking you how you know she committed sins

What did she need to be saved from if she did not commit sins?

124 posted on 12/06/2006 8:52:11 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: paulat
[ No, hosepipe...it is a Catholic belief that Mary ascended into Heaven, just like her Son. ]

I know.. I just wanted somebody(else) to say it so the lurkers could consider the ramifications of it..

125 posted on 12/06/2006 8:57:01 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

;)


126 posted on 12/06/2006 8:59:58 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: what's up
What did she need to be saved from if she did not commit sins?

According to Catholic belief...Mary did not carry the burden of Original Sin...the burden that the rest of humanity carries.

In Catholicism, she is considered to be the only pure human being ever.

127 posted on 12/06/2006 9:02:08 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
I doubt its Paul, but if so, whats the big deal. If they found the burial site og Jodeph of Arimathea, then I would do a Holy Grail handstand!

OOOOOoops , I forgot that the grail lineage is not PC! ( sarc). Why elese would they be derching for the bones but to have a new novel? Its perfect, the bones glowin the dark as several sleuths conive to steal the bones, trace their keepers of ancient lineage, and read to secret codex of the lost epistle of Paul, that was kept secret but for initiates of the Order of the Glowing Sarcophagous?

Oh the propaganda that men decompose!

128 posted on 12/06/2006 9:04:53 PM PST by Candor7 (Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulat
I'm aware of Catholic teaching.

But Mary herself claims that she needed a Savior (as every human being other than Christ does).

129 posted on 12/06/2006 9:05:43 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: what's up
But Mary herself claims that she needed a Savior (as every human being other than Christ does).

Mary was a Jew...of COURSE she wanted a Messiah.

130 posted on 12/06/2006 9:09:01 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: paulat
In Catholicism, she is considered to be the only pure human being ever.

No. Catholicism teaches that Jesus Christ was a pure (i.e. sinless) human being, and that Mary's sinlessness was due to Christ.

-A8

131 posted on 12/06/2006 9:09:32 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
No. Catholicism teaches that Jesus Christ was a pure (i.e. sinless) human being, and that Mary's sinlessness was due to Christ.

A Jesuetical fine point I will grant.

132 posted on 12/06/2006 9:11:15 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000; theothercheek; kiriath_jearim; Gadfly-At-Large; pryncessraych; aroostook war; TheRake; ...

+

If you want on (or off) this Catholic and Pro-Life ping list, let me know!



Here is a chance to gently refute the anti-Catholic lies that surround us.


133 posted on 12/06/2006 9:13:10 PM PST by narses (St Thomas says "lex injusta non obligat.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulat

"...it is a Catholic belief that Mary ascended into Heaven, just like her Son."

Actually it is the belief of both Orthodox and Catholic Christians that Mary WAS ASSUMED into heaven.
She did not ascend like her Son.


134 posted on 12/06/2006 9:25:18 PM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: rogator
Please don't be a jerk...I CLEARLY named the Feast of the Assumption....

No, hosepipe...it is a Catholic belief that Mary ascended into Heaven, just like her Son. The belief is that she was the only totally pure human being.

The Catholic church celebrates the Feast of the Assumption.

Google has a lot of information

135 posted on 12/06/2006 9:31:27 PM PST by paulat (about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: indcons; blam; FairOpinion; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thanks indcons. It does, but it's just shown up as a different topic, so no ping, alas.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

136 posted on 12/06/2006 9:52:17 PM PST by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Thursday, November 16, 2006 https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

alas... although you did use AP instead of Pravda (six of one...):

Vatican archaeologists unearth St. Paul's tomb
Pravda | December 6, 2006
Posted on 12/06/2006 9:18:21 AM EST by NYer
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1749237/posts


137 posted on 12/06/2006 9:54:53 PM PST by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Thursday, November 16, 2006 https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up
That is always a good practice but if you're going to be honest about that you will have to acknowledge that they did not teach that Mary was sinless or was assumed into Heaven.

How else would that tradition have started? BTW Mary's home in Ephesus is still an honored site, even by the Muslims who live there, who honor Mary as the mother of Jesus.

138 posted on 12/06/2006 9:55:31 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: quark

well anyway I like it


139 posted on 12/06/2006 9:56:52 PM PST by woofie (This area deemed a failure, Something new and witty will no doubt emerge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rogator

what is the difference between "assumed" (taken up) and ascention? (moving upward)


140 posted on 12/06/2006 9:59:53 PM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Alas, the search for a previous post didn't because of the apostrophe in "Paul's" in the earlier headline. And we used different keywords.


141 posted on 12/06/2006 10:28:16 PM PST by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

After the resurrection, Jesus offered His own wounds as proof it was indeed He. What that a deception?


142 posted on 12/06/2006 10:29:30 PM PST by A.J.Armitage (http://calvinist-libertarians.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
How else would that tradition have started?

What do you mean? Any number of ways. Lots of traditions were started apart from the Apostles' teaching.

143 posted on 12/06/2006 10:30:52 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

It's a tricky search, can be hard to find stuff.


144 posted on 12/06/2006 10:32:35 PM PST by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Thursday, November 16, 2006 https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
The Bible denies that it is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

You are, of course, misrepresenting those passages badly. Paul doesn't say, and Scripture doesn't say, that anything we need to know is outside the Canon and would always be outside the Canon. Remember that when Paul wrote the Gospels weren't written yet, but now they have been written (a rather significant difference).

145 posted on 12/06/2006 10:34:59 PM PST by A.J.Armitage (http://calvinist-libertarians.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
After the resurrection, Jesus offered His own wounds as proof it was indeed He.

If you say Jesus' wounds went with him to heaven then are you saying the paraplegic will continue to have to use a wheelchair in heaven for lack of missing limbs? Those who died in fire will walk around with dripping flesh? Lepers will carry leprosy-scarred skin with them?

146 posted on 12/06/2006 10:44:04 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

You didn't answer the question. Probably because you DO believe Jesus deceived the disciples.


147 posted on 12/06/2006 11:01:28 PM PST by A.J.Armitage (http://calvinist-libertarians.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Lots of traditions were started apart from the Apostles' teaching.

According to tradition, the Apostle Luke got the story of the Nativity from Mary, herself. Is it out of the question to assume that he and some of the other Apostles may have witnessed Mary's Assumption and told the followers of Jesus about it? If it's not in the Bible, that wouldn't be unusual, after all, the Gospels are the story of Jesus's Incarnation, His public life of ministry, His Crucifixion, and His Resurrection. The letters from Paul, Peter and the other apostles to the new Christian communties were exhortations to live as Jesus had taught.

The New Testament is not Mary's story. That's why it doesn't include stories of what she did when she left Jerusalem, after Jesus's Ascension. We know Jesus placed her in the care of the youngest Apostle, and there are suggestions that she eventually moved to Ephesus, where there was a new Christian community. There is a house there that is purported to be that of Mary. But that isn't in the New Testament, either, even though Paul writes to the Ephesians several times.

I choose to believe that it is tradition, passed down through the teachings of the Apostles, and later their disciples. You may not believe it, but I don't know of any evidence that it isn't true.

148 posted on 12/06/2006 11:38:49 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

bumpus ad summum


149 posted on 12/06/2006 11:50:26 PM PST by Dajjal (See my FR homepage for new essay about Ahmadinejad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
You didn't answer the question.

Neither did you.

150 posted on 12/07/2006 12:09:26 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-409 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson