Mysterious bones of Jesus, Joseph and Mary

The Daily Telegraph (UK) ^ | February 24, 2007 | By Tim Butcher in Jerusalem

[aculeus]

Oh man, where's my popcorn? These threads are amusing.

Some FR clowns post articles just to enjoy the reactions.

;-)

[Halgr]

I sent a message to the Discovery Channel yesterday advising them that if they air this garbage I will disconnect their service.

[MHGinTN]

*

[Cvengr]

"Wait, is this using science to try and disprove the existence of God? I thought that science could not do that?"

God doesn't mind, ...just be sure you don't use any of the atoms, molecules, or forces He created in an attempt to disprove Him, so that the scientist doesn't get dragged down into circular reasoning.

[xJones]

.... archaeologists a quarter of a century ago unearthed a burial chamber near Jerusalem. Inside they found ossuaries, or boxes of bones, marked with the names of Jesus, Joseph and Mary.

Those Mexicans sure get around. :-)>

Not nice, you made me laugh and I was eating breakfast.:)

[ColdSteelTalon]

The Jesus I know did not leave any bones as he was resurrected from the dead so I'll refrain from buying into the hype.

Thats right otherwise the apostles would not have gone to their deaths (many of them), if it were a lie.

[Frank Sheed]

Doesn't the Discovery Channel usually just run crime scene stuff with the guy with the deep baritone voice. I seem to recall that as I "surf by" it every day on the way to something meaningful.

Waiting for the Holy Week stuff showing, for example, that Jesus has relatives living in Toledo, OH. That always crops up to amuse the atheists and agnostics during the holiest week in the Christian year.

S/F
F

[Cyman]

Hoffa?

[Filio]

But felt the most 'convenient' part was:

"That ossuary has subsequently gone missing..." (sic.)

I am willing to renounce my faith, the moment a fragment of a bone can be scientifically proved to be that of Christ. In fact, the Bible puts the entire faith on the line by going as far as saying literally: "If Christ has not been raised (from the dead), your faith is in vain" (1 Corinthians 15). Dig that baby!

I mean - Christ was either a mad man or He is who He claimed to be in John 10: 30.

[Halgr]

AMEN!!!!!

[Tanniker Smith]

Scripture says that "Flesh and Bone" CANNOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven!

Which is what makes it all the more astounding that Mary was assumed body and soul into Heaven. God makes the rules, you know.

[Paulus Invictus]

"Flesh and Bone" CANNOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven!

OK, where does it say that? I looked in my KJV and couldn't find the quote." Old Job did say, however: "In my flesh I shall see God."

[Filio]

Oh dear... sould you insist on making a public display of your illiteracy? I mean... twice in one post...?!

"the idea of such sinlessness and ascension by Mary was unknown in the uniform writings of the church fathers"

Obviously you have'nt read St. St. John the Theologian (circa 80 A.D.):
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0832.htm

"the doctrine of Mary as a co-redemptrix from sin by your last pope"

No such thing happened! There was a petition by some to consider it - but Joh Paul II simply did not decree such a dogma!

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15459a.htm

[HereInTheHeartland]

Matthew 28:12 already covered this. They were always determined to discredit Him.

"12When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' 14If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." 15So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day."

Matthew 28:12

[George W. Bush]

Obviously you have'nt read St. St. John the Theologian (circa 80 A.D.)

One superstitious ancient theologian does not a uniform consensus of the church fathers for the sinlessness and ascension of Mary make.

The very fact that this doctrine was not promulgated until recently should demonstrate it is not and has never been a foundational belief of Christians in any era.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[George W. Bush]

I looked at your link on St. John The Theologian.

Pathetic and obvious superstition. Are you suggesting that this account is or was regarded as divinely inspired? I'll answer for you. Of course not. Neither the Council of Hippo nor the Council of Trent in the thirteenth century affirmed it in the canon.

As for the doctrine of the sinlessness of Mary, we can read in Wisdom 8:19-20: "And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled."

And this is to be compared to the very direct and repeated clear statements about Jesus as born without sin? This is precisely why the doctrine was never promulgated and the testimony, such as it is, of Wisdom was never considered divinely inspired within the ancient churches of the East or West.

In general, we should cast a suspicious eye upon all novel doctrines unknown to the great ancient scholars. Look at the opinion of Jerome on the Book Of Wisdom and the rest of the Apocrypha: "As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine." - Jerome, preface to the books of Solomon.

If you think Jerome was a damned fool or some anti-Catholic, perhaps you should review the opinions of about a hundred other very famous ancient authorities in the churches. Those who spoke against the Apocrypha included Pope Gregory the Great (540-604), Cardinal Ximenes, and Cardinal Cajetan. And although Augustine was an early proponent of the Apocrypha, after investigation, he also turned against these books thoroughly.

As for the idea of 'assumption', this is hardly a novel superstition in ancient times. You can look at other books rejected from the canon, found in the Pseudepigrapha which contains books like Enoch, Michael the Archangel, and Jannes and Jambres. Many of these books falsely claim to have been written by various Old Testament patriarchs and were composed between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. More tellingly, there are books named: The Assumption of Moses and the Ascension of Isaiah.

What a lot of superstitious claptrap.

[N3WBI3]

Im sorry is the ascension of Mary scriptural or not?

[N3WBI3]

Whether there is or not, my Bible tells me not to be a "stumbling block" to other Christians. Since I don't believe it matters to our salvation one way or the other whether one believes Mary's body ascended to Heaven

But when you tie it up with the catholic belief Mary was without sin you cross a bridge that leads to false doctrine of the heretical kind.

[Frank Sheed]

Matthew 2:23: "And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene."

What prophet said that in the Old Testament?