I've got some long posts to which I need respond, so I'm gonna skip ahead a bit and make a short point concerning post #91 before I get back to the long posts in the #60s and #70s.
"The easiest thing of all is to deceive one's self; for what a man wishes he generally believes to be true." ~~ Demosthenes 91 posted on 11/24/2003 9:31 AM PST by eastsider
This is actually a great quote -- but not for the reason eastsider thinks. Lemme 'splain...
The fact of the matter is, I'm not "married" to the absolute certainty that Simon Peter was buried in the region of Jerusalem -- if I were, I'd be "newly-married" at best, as I've never been particularly bothered by the traditions which claim Peter was buried in Rome (for me, the claim of Peter's burial in Rome is orthogonal to the legitimacy of the Papacy in any event, so it's not a critical issue to me). I've never presumed as a certainty that these traditions, not being directly supported by the Bible, were unquestionably true; but neither have they troubled me.
On the other hand, if Peter was in fact buried in the region of Jerusalem, that doesn't bother me either. I just never gave it much thought until I came across some articles regarding the ossuary of Simon bar-Jona, together with Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, within this Christian cemetery in the Jerusalem area.
So let's try a little thought exercise... and see if we can find some double-standards at play.
SUPPOSE that the untampered Ossuary of Simon bar-Jona had been discovered... underneath the Vatican.- Likely response from OP? "Hmm. This appears to be good archaeological evidence for the arguments of those who claim that Peter was buried in Rome. I find that of interest."
- Likely response from Roman Catholics? "Yes, indeedy!! Well, that cinches it... not to say we told you so, but -- oh, now you're gonna tell us it's not the Simon bar-Jona? Well, me oh my, you can lead a horse to water... I tell you, some people."
Tell me I'm wrong.
Now, on the other hand....
SUPPOSE that the untampered Ossuary of Simon bar-Jona has been discovered... in the region of Jerusalem. (as it has been)- Likely response from OP? Well, posted above, but in essence -- "Hmm. This appears to be good archaeological evidence for the arguments of those who DISPUTE that Peter was buried in Rome. I find that of interest."
- Likely response from Roman Catholics? "FRAUD!! Certainly a fraud!! What... not one Roman Scholar has ever contested the authenticity of the burial cave, or the untampered ossuaries therein? Well, then, it obviously can't be the Simon bar-Jona... it must be some other Simon bar-Jona! And some other Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, too! And while we're at it, you're a creep for even bringing this up and probably a latent homosexual."
Hmmm. Howzabout that.
You might say.... The easiest thing of all is to deceive one's self; for what a man wishes he generally believes to be true.