Your email address is safe with us. View our Privacy policy.
Vatican: Relics analysis is inconclusive
Ulderico Santamaria, the head of the lab and a science professor at Tuscia University, urged caution in assuming the remains are those of St. Paul, the Italian News Service ANSA reported Friday.
Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, the archpriest of the basilica of St. Paul's Outside the Walls, said he is optimistic the tomb found under his church in 2006 is that of the saint.
Since St. Paul's execution in around A.D. 65, tradition has placed his remains in the church outside the walls of the old city of Rome. The tomb was found under the epigraph "Paulo Apostolo Mart'" or Paul the Apostle and Martyr.
Christian tradition says he was buried by a Roman woman and the church was built over his tomb.
Paul is among the most venerated figures in early Christianity. He is credited with being the first to bring the gospel to the Greeks and Romans.
Copyright 2009 by United Press International
This news arrived on: 07/04/2009
Printer Friendly Version | Send this page to a friend | Post Comment
Rate This Story:
Great - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Bad
Thank you for your input.
Posted Comments:
07-05-2009 08:10
wrote:
It seems odd to me that they passed on an opportunity to exalt their particular brand of voodoo.
07-04-2009 18:56
OMG wrote:
JAKE
The AD/BC notation was first proposed by the monk Dionysius Exiguus - under the direction of Pope St. John I - in the year 525 CE (AD 525 to you). He used it to identify the years in the EASTER tables he had prepared, and did NOT use the notation to date HISTORICAL events! It took about 400 years for this dating system to reach common usage...
You screamed in capital letters: "WHEN DID THEY START COUNTING??" Well, now you know.
So this "FICTICIOUS JESUS" (sic) was calculated to have been born about five centuries before the current date of the existing Alexandrian calendar - giving birth to the theoretical Year One. At the time, this was believed to be the date of the foundation of Rome - which was far more important to them than dating The Very First Christmas.
In response to your parting sentence, I can only imagine that your high school diploma "is a work of fiction", too.
You screamed in capital letters: "WHEN DID THEY START COUNTING??" Well, now you know.
So this "FICTICIOUS JESUS" (sic) was calculated to have been born about five centuries before the current date of the existing Alexandrian calendar - giving birth to the theoretical Year One. At the time, this was believed to be the date of the foundation of Rome - which was far more important to them than dating The Very First Christmas.
In response to your parting sentence, I can only imagine that your high school diploma "is a work of fiction", too.
07-04-2009 15:24
JAKE wrote:
WHAT YEAR IS THIS??
TO W LAMPHERE
JUST ONE COMMENT
WHAT YEAR IS THIS?
WHEN DID THEY START COUNTING??
WHEN DID THIS FICTICIOUS JESUS LIVE??
IS IT NOT STRANGE THAT THE CALENDAR STARTED THAT WE USE AROUND THE WORLD HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME TIME THAT JESUS LIVED AND DIED??
I SUGGEST W LAMPHERE IS A WORK OF FICTION.
JUST ONE COMMENT
WHAT YEAR IS THIS?
WHEN DID THEY START COUNTING??
WHEN DID THIS FICTICIOUS JESUS LIVE??
IS IT NOT STRANGE THAT THE CALENDAR STARTED THAT WE USE AROUND THE WORLD HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME TIME THAT JESUS LIVED AND DIED??
I SUGGEST W LAMPHERE IS A WORK OF FICTION.
07-04-2009 14:50
w lamphere wrote:
Dubious existance
Apart from the New Testament letters claiming such existance, no evidence exists to establish the existance of ANY of the New Testament Characters. A person may believe in such religious documentation if they so choose, however, if they wish to believe based on actual evidence, there is none, because such evidence is simply non-existant, as fits a work of religious fiction. Even according to the NT book of John, that there were so many deeds done be Jesus that if they had been written, the issue would be so many books that the world would be flooded by so many documents, yet strangely, there is a dearth, a lack of any commentary OUTSIDE of the NT and few other pseudo gospel writings, therefore one can assume that since there are NO graphical evidence by any of the well known historical commentarists of that era mentioning anything about Jesus or his deeds, that such a person and deeds are indeed merely a classical work of religious fiction.
07-04-2009 14:10
bridget wrote:
the relics
this is from an old fashioned Catholic.I was taught by the nuns from 1954 to 1962 and we were told all about Paul.We actually believed this.Look..I dont know if any of these so called saints existed....there wasnt any written records to show that they existed..but I have always doubted the relics of Paul because I never liked his stand on women and teachings...now that the vatican states that these relics maybe not be Paul...what does this give to their stand on women as priests? Can my Church get into todays times...that would be nice and if that happens.I will return every sunday.
Comment archive | Comment FAQ's
 |
 |
View Religion & Spirituality ezine stories by date or visit the complete archive |
The ArcaMax Politics channel is one of 70 content categories offered by ArcaMax Publishing on this ... |
VideoSquares.com
