Posted on 02/17/2005 12:58:57 PM PST by Mike Fieschko
Rome, Feb. 17 (CWNews.com) - Vatican archeologists believe that they have identified the tomb of St. Paul in the Roman basilica that bears his name.A sarcophagus which may contain the remains of St. Paul was identified in the basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls, reports Giorgio Filippi, a archeology specialist with the Vatican Museums. The sarcophagus was discovered during the excavations carried out in 2002 and 2003 around the basilica, which is located in the south of Rome. Having reached what they believe is a positive identification of the tomb, Vatican experts will soon make a public announcement of their discovery.
Well...I'm gonna get offline...it seems we won't solve our differences here.
I still think I'm right. I find no problem with Paul's authority being intact if he's dictating to someone.
So maybe it was his eyes. Either way, and regardless, the point I've been trying to make is, that when the books were written, Paul couldn't write them himself. Someone else was taking these down. It's no different than admitting that Mark didn't write Mark...it makes it no less true and no less authoritarian. Paul's lack of ability to write properly, it seems to me, suggests the guy couldn't write really well. I still think that the language seems to indicate "Hey, look! You know how terrible I write! Well...look at this!" Maybe it was blindness that made him unable to write. But I can write, and even were I to go blind tomorrow, I don't think that, say, 20 years from now, were I to write something, I'd say "look at how crappy and giant my letters are." If anything I think my writing would get smaller, assuming others could see it.
Anywho, it's been fun. God Bless.
I can think of large groups of people who would be slightly less than pleased over this discovery.
"If the DNA says these remains are 100% European at least we would know it isn't Paul."
Based upon what would make you say this? Christ send his disciples to the 'lost sheep' of the house of Israel, now exactly where did that message end up.
He listened to his mother.
Maybe he was just homely.
Didn't see you here ping.
"Recall that he encouraged those who wanted gentiles to be circumcised that the enforcers should go further and castrate themselves completely. That's not something I'd expect Jesus Himself to say"
I disagree. Paul was writing under the influence and guidance of the Holy Spirit. There is no error in what he wrote. Besides, Paul was using a rhetorical hyperbole to make a point about those Judiazers that would require gentile Christians to be circumcized - become Jews. The Lord Jesus Himself used strong language in His condemnation of pharisees, sadducees, the priests. Paul wasn't far from his Lord in his verbage.
Whatever, I do agree that Paul probably carried, although fully forgiven, lingering guilt all his life about what he had done to his fellow Christians before he became a believer. He referred to himself as the least of the apostles for this reason. It was not something he gloried in, except that he had been redeemed from it.
Whatever,
I don't know about in Paul's time but from what I've read about ancient Egypt that's exactly what they were.
Thanks goodness! Can we finally put to rest that old chestnut and assume that "Grant" is buried there, too? ;)
My Dear sweet anonymoussierra! You are doing beautifully!
I am embarrassed that I cannot talk a word in your language.
You are doing just fine. I can "read" your passion in your posts!
I love that!
God bless you!
Thanks. This is fascinating. I've been there but my attitude was that maybe he's buried there, and maybe he's not.
Grn, my point was that they were ASSUMPTIONS....not facts.
Another possibility for the "thorn" was that it was malaria or some other bug born disease.
I forget the assumptions, but one of them I remember had something to do with Paul leaving coastal Turkey and going to inland and higher elevation Turkey (Asia Minor.)
So, what happens to the skull of Paul that was long claimed by rome now? I suppose this is the latest version of the side show?
I am sure we would get along just fine. And lets not get into an argument over Paul for goodness sakes, it would not be seemly.
Where? I just cited Galatians 6:11 where it says the opposite. When a letter is dictated, Paul does not hide the fact, as, for example, he makes an addition in his own hand. There is a consistent impression one gets, that Paul had poor and deteriorating vision, was proud of himself when he could write even with big letters, and dictated when he had an opportunity.
The important part is authorship, of course. However, your assertion that he was illiterate is based on nothing.
Prove it.
You need Jesus.
"Two reasons tombs are opened are to see if the deceased is incorrupt, and to take relics."
The first is curiosity, the second is grave robbing.
But you're right, I hadn't considered willfull desecration.
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.