It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Science confirms tomb contains mortal remains of Apostle Paul, says Pope

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Hi/

Greece seems to already have the relics of the Apostle Paul?
I think that the Pope should retire!

Im trying to get some Greek news and ill post it back here!

ICXC NIKA
helen




posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by bismarcksea
reply to post by eradown
 


They where all Jews. To the best of my knowledge.


In Rome not everyone was Jewish. Certainly not all of the Christians at the time were Jewish. Not all the Jews were from Tarsus. I'm pretty sure the remains belong to Paul. There is so much archeology could tell about Paul things no one knew.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by eradown]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Science did NOT confirm anything but the fact someone living in that timeframe was buried there.

There is nothing to test against to say beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is the body of Paul.

With this same reasoning they are using, I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus never existed... it can't be proven he did and I don't need evidence to back up my claims.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TwiTcHomatic
Science did NOT confirm anything but the fact someone living in that timeframe was buried there.

There is nothing to test against to say beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is the body of Paul.

With this same reasoning they are using, I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus never existed... it can't be proven he did and I don't need evidence to back up my claims.


Ah, but when you say it, it's unforgivable blasphemy. When an old nazi with a big white hat says it, it's gospel.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


this is so bogus

there is simply no way to confirm the identity

they are using what? paintings, etchings, or some old text?

it's just all hearsay, why? to give the church a little boost of limelight and maybe gain a few converts and refresh the faith of existing initiates

bones where often moved around in the past, especially dignitaries and monarchs (for security, conspiracy and whatever)

wow another shroud of Turin everyone can debate for like 20 years

this belongs in the HOAX forum
because that's what it is, another religious HOAX meant to propagate their dominance over whoever falls for it




posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by warrenb
reply to post by Gorman91
 


this is so bogus

there is simply no way to confirm the identity

they are using what? paintings, etchings, or some old text?

it's just all hearsay, why? to give the church a little boost of limelight and maybe gain a few converts and refresh the faith of existing initiates

bones where often moved around in the past, especially dignitaries and monarchs (for security, conspiracy and whatever)

wow another shroud of Turin everyone can debate for like 20 years

this belongs in the HOAX forum
because that's what it is, another religious HOAX meant to propagate their dominance over whoever falls for it


Hi,
What does the shroud of turin have ANYthing to do what what is being discussed?
Its a HOAX about what?
Finding an Icon of S.Paul!

What does increasing one's faith or having new converts have anything to do with the findings of St Pauls potrait?

As for the (relics) bones of The Apostle Paul, I dont have a clue as to what the Pope is on about...

ICXC NIKA
helen



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by warrenb
 


Nope, not bogus.All you have to do is see if he's eastern or not.

Again, to be an easterner in Rome was to be an enemy of Rome. Rome and Seleucid hated each other. The Jews of the time were just a piece of the former Greek empire. To the Romans, they were spear wall forming old timers in long need of subservience to Rome.

So if his genes are Eastern, he is Paul. There's simply no one else he could be, as all other easterners would be in prison or war.

reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 


Nope. Still not creepy. It's just a symbol. Jews use the star of David, a symbol, in the modern age, of torture under the Nazis. Some Muslims countries that are pretty peaceful use a sword and usually some script calling battle.

These are simply symbols.

Also bear in mind the cross is NOT a symbol of torture. It's a symbol of dieing for your fate, or putting faith in front of life.

Does this creep you out?



Under your logic it should. It's just shapes and colors to you, because you're not Iranian. But to an Iranian is symbolizes and brings to thought a parallel to when Christians see the cross. These three colors may seem innocent to you, just as a cross might seem innocent to someone not knowing it's meaning. But if you know their meaning, you understand. The colors mean Faith, Peace, and Blood of the Martyrs.... Oh wait, that's the exact meaning of the cross to Christians.

Understand that not all things mean what you think they mean, and not all things that seem disgusting to you are disgusting to all. Everything means something to someone. The cross may seem to symbolize death, torture, and pain, but that's to you. To the Common Christian it does not mean that, just as to the common Iranian it is not simply 3 colors.

reply to post by merky
 


I don't understand what you're going on about. They KNEW it was under their noses. They just didn't care.

Wouldn't it have been better to take the bones out eons ago and put them on display to, like, you know, have physical proof displayed by all.

I think it actually makes the church look a bit less evil. They had physical proof, they just didn't care. You either accept the tradition that Paul is there are you don't. Turns out this tradition was right. Makes you wonder how many of the ancient pre-pope Leo traditions were correct.

[edit on 30-6-2009 by Gorman91]

[edit on 30-6-2009 by Gorman91]



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   

No proof that Vatican bones are St Paul's, says Dutch expert


is.gd...




posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91

www.asianews.it


I am forced to agree with much of what the Pope states there, about the notion of a cosmological Christ, and of an inward transformation generating an outward manifestation of new creation and new possibility for man.

It would be easier for me if he did not understand and express such ideas, as I am a rebel against a structured, organized, hiearchical, instutionalized church, but if the Pope is transmitting such messages and depth of appreciation for the mystery of Christ and of Christ crucified, then good on him.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


paul was a roman citizen, thats why he came to rome, to plead his case in front of caesar.
might have come from the east, but was born a citizen of rome.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


He was a Hellenistic Jew.

Eastern.

It was traditional to keep Greek slaves, use Greek labor, etc. Why the hate of the Greeks so? Who knows.


reply to post by OmegaPoint
 


Even a corrupt organization can change it's ways.

There's no laws that says what is evil cannot become good.

[edit on 30-6-2009 by Gorman91]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 
Agreed
star for you.
Gorman91, there is nothing wrong with love or respect for the dead, but there's a reason most cultures bury or burn them away from areas in common use: a corpse is a thing that looks & smells horrible & also presents significant health hazards. I've been to a few old churches where there was a faint sour mouldy whiff about the place... naaaarsty!



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
As has been stated, there is no way this could be scientifically proven to be Paul. It could possibly prove that it’s not him, but that’s about it. Even if tests showed that the bone’s DNA was Eskimo in type, who’s to say Paul wasn’t adopted? (Ok, far fetched I know, but you get my point)

Why the heck does it matter anyway? This is why Moses went off to die alone, so that his bones would not become an idol. The church of Rome does like her idols. Silly humans, it’s a spiritual kingdom.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
So how do they know its actually PAUL? and not some old bones that someone saw fit to place in there a couple of hundred years ago?

Surely they would have a DNA bloodline to compare it to say thats its actually Paul?

Or does it simply mean that they have confirmed that there IS a 2000 year old body in the sarcophigus?



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
The Christian, uhhh....church? organization? faith?...is rife with frauds of every conceivable sort. Why should this be any different? Historically, whenever the faithful flagged a bit in support, the church comes up with a new amazing artifact, revelation, whatever it takes to restore faith.


With recent news articles suggesting that the church in it's current format, will not survive for more than another 30 years (at least in the UK) I'd say you have a fairly accurate assessment of the situation.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Many of these calls for “PROOF!” are simply unreasonable and show a lack of understanding of how archeology comes to identify ANY ancient personality.

Are the findings consistent with what we know of Paul or not, I think this is the best assessment any professional could give for any ancient character whether they be Pharaohs, Kings or Apostles. The Church can say the remains belong to whoever they wish but I would like to see a modern team of investigators give a determination.

I think you will see more of these announcements as the Roman Church begins a campaign of revealing its treasures not only to edify the faithful but also to declare the truth of the Gospel to an increasingly hostile world.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by monkcaw
 


It has long been my suspicion that the church hurdles ancient items for the people's own protection, in their eyes at least. They'd rather no war over a twig from the cross, or a string from a robe.

It is very likely they will begin releasing this stuff, in a much more secular and calmer world were wars don't happen over twigs.

Still, it's odd if the church foresaw that future developments would eventually allow them to prove these artifacts ar from something or someone. That takes a degree of foresight uncommon in the ancient world.


As to everyony who says they can never prove it, I will give a parallel. If they find a wall where a town was supposedly suppose to be, it is concluded that the town was not a legend but real.

Similarly, if they find a piece of DNA evidence linking him to Arabic and Greek genealogy, he is Paul, simply because that's how it's been held by legend.

There's also plenty other ways to look at it scientifically.

I don't know much because I've forgotten, but if Paul was one of the guys at pentecost, then he was one of the people who could speak and hear all languages. If true, check his skull. Is the language part of the brain bigger? See the compressions against the skull.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Holy Crapolli Bat Man! First off, Paul was not at Pentecost, but even if he was you wouldn’t expect a larger part of the brain because of it. Not everyone who was at Pentecost could understand all languages. The gift of tounges was temporal, and was meant to witness to others. It’s spiritual, get it?

As to your wall analogy, it’s just really poor. A wall proves that someone built a wall. A set of bones does not prove who’s bones they are.

If DNA proves the bones to be of Arabic and Greek descent, what the heck does that have to do with Paul? We know that he was Jewish, and a Pharisee, but what does that really prove about his genetics? The Jews had already been taken captive in Babylon, and dispersed among many nations, so you would have to expect a lot of genetic variability.

Oh, and just so you’ll know, wars have never happened over twigs, they always happen over money, power and land. I suppose a twig could be used as an excuse to give to the people though. It would have to be one high powered twig.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by resistor
 


Paul was a Hellenistic Jew. So if the genes are eastern, it's Paul. The only other Greeks in Rome were slaves, usually. And I doubt a slave would be buried with golden linen.

Sorry about Pentecost. I don't know crap about my own religion's traditions. 'Tis typical of catholics though, so meh.

The point is that an easterner's body buried at that time period with those clothings could only be a man of value in the church. Or Woman for all we know. No slave could be buried with these items, and Rome was known to enslave the Greeks at that time period. I'm not sure the were a whole lot of Greeks in Rome at that time period besides slaves.

So even though he was Jewish, at this time period Jews were very much so filled with Greek genetics over such long assimilation.

If he has any genes from East of Istanbul, it is very probable he was Paul, or another famous Christian. Being underground, it's likely Christian.

[edit on 1-7-2009 by Gorman91]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   
I agree seems pretty self serviant saying that was indeed him,only evidence in this case is taking the Catholic churches word that this indeed who they say it,and does remind me of the shroud of Turin,been proven a fake over and over,as far as the word of the Pope,his opinion and about 5 bucks will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join