Pope: Scientific analysis done on St. Paul's bones

[undeterred]

Source: The Washington Post

By NICOLE WINFIELD
The Associated Press
Sunday, June 28, 2009; 3:57 PM

ROME -- The first-ever scientific tests on what are believed to be the remains of the Apostle Paul "seem to conclude" that they do indeed belong to the Roman Catholic saint, Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday.

Archaeologists recently unearthed and opened the white marble sarcophagus located under the Basilica of St. Paul's Outside the Walls in Rome, which for some 2,000 years has been believed by the faithful to be the tomb of St. Paul.

Benedict said scientists had conducted carbon dating tests on bone fragments found inside the sarcophagus and confirmed that they date from the first or second century.

"This seems to confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that they are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul," Benedict said, announcing the findings at a service in the basilica to mark the end of the Vatican's Paoline year, in honor of the apostle.


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR2009062801356.html

---

Maybe next the Pope will apply scientific analysis to human reproduction... :shrug:

[hedgehog]

1. I'm more interested in scientific analysis of the Letters of St. Paul.

I suspect a lot of the misogyny was added later.

[flyingfysh]

17. there is a great deal of scholarship about those letters

These letters have been extensively studied by scholars in the last couple of hundred years, who have come to lots of interesting conclusions. A starting point could be books by Bart Ehrman, but these conclusions are not new with him. Some letters are genuine, some are forgeries, some have more tangled histories (for example, 2nd Corinthians may be several shorter letters stuck together). There are lots and lots of copying mistakes among the various manuscripts; some are trivial, some drastically change the meaning of the text. It has been said that there are more variations in the text of the New Testament than there are words in the New Testament.

[Dr.Phool]

2. It proves they have a 2,000 year old male human corpse.

Now, as to the identity, is anybody's guess.

[dbonds]

3. Proving time frame does not prove they are from Paul.

Although if the time frame didn't match it would prove they are not. Doesn't matter to me whether they are or are not the bones, just that this does not prove they are.

[undeterred]

6. I guess there is a tomb

that is considered to be St. Pauls. But considering the fascination with 'relics' from the bodies of saints that went on for centuries, the bones in it could be anyones.

[boppers]

30. Heck, those could be "bones from some dude's chicken dinner".

They didn't indicate any tests were run to even verify the bone fragments were human.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

4. interesting.

[DFW]

5. And seeing as how Paul was the only male alive in Rome during a span of 100 years

There can be no doubt, right?

[jazzjunkysue]

47. It's not like the church was ever known to mark anything...with labels, or anything

Just cause the egyptians could do it, doesn't mean the all powerful roman catholic church could.

I guess those popes aren't quite as infallible as they let on.....

[bulloney]

7. But you're supposed to believe it because the Pope says so.

Just like we're to believe that a snake talked to Adam and Eve. Never mind that there have been no other confirmations of humans conversing with snakes.

Just like we're to believe that priests actually turn ordinary bread and wine into Jesus' actual body and blood during every mass. Because the church says so!

While I believe there is some type of a supreme being, I've come to think that religion is largely a way for people to explain the inexplicable. As science advances and comes up with explanations of how or why things happen, it replaces the "pure" religious beliefs people have had on these things. The open-minded, critical-thinking people accept these findings. Those whose minds are not as developed get defensive and regress.

[lunatica]

8. Do they use scientific analysis to prove miracles before cannonizing saints?

Have they used scientific analysis to prove the inherent inferiority of women?

Funny how science can be so conveniently used. Did anyone know of this scientific analysis before the bones were found to be from the right time frame?

[undeterred]

16. Most importantly, they don't use science

to think about human reproduction- things like contraception, which is a sin. They need to let modern science influence their theology, just like the US needs to let science influence its policy.

[DemBones DemBones]

37. Yes, there has to be reliable medical testimony that

a healing cannot be explained other than as a miracle, and it takes two verified miracles to be canonized, plus a thorough investigation of the proposed saint's life.

[lunatica]

40. What medical testimony? 12th Century medicine?

[SkyDaddy7]

9. The POPE is Cold Blooded Killer!!

...Don't talk about Science and the Pope when that ignorant FOOL tells people in Africa that it is a sin to use condoms...FUCK THE POPE!







I agree, this proves they have a box of 1800-2000yr old bones fragments...Nothing more.

[pennylane100]

10. I prefer the title The Head Ped.

[SkyDaddy7]

46. LOL!

That title works well!

[asteroid2003QQ47]

11. What utter rot! A pox on Benny and...

Paul too!

------------------------

"The Christian view that all intercourse outside marriage is immoral was, as we see in the... passages from St. Paul, based upon the view that all sexual intercourse, even within marriage, is regrettable. A view of this sort, which goes against biological facts, can only be regarded by sane people as a morbid aberration. The fact that it is embedded in Christian ethics has made Christianity throughout its whole history a force tending towards mental disorders and unwholesome views of life."
(Bertrand Russell / 1872-1970 / Marriage and Morals)

[bertman]

32. Thank you, asteroid2003QQ47 for that quote from Bertrand Russell. I've been thinking

that since I was about age 19, and have finally found someone who explained it perfectly.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

42. You're very welcome, bertman. n/t

[pjt7]

12. St.Paul & Peter might have been

the real deal. Who knows? Whatever the Catholic Church has progressed into, has no bearing on that.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

14. :ROFL: eom

[mrs_p]

13. confirms nothing of the sort

let's get this truly peer-reviewed. what utter nonsense.

[Simplyaverage]

15. Has an independent panel confirmed the Pope's assertion?

Has such panel vouched for the validity of the alleged test?

[undeterred]

19. Well, I kind of doubt the Pope has a lab of his own.

[Ian David]

26. Sure he does. In The Pope Cave.

He slides down The Pope Pole to get there.

[Mrs. Overall]

18. Hmmm, my conservative Catholic family members say that carbon dating is unreliable--

and that's why evolution or ancient geographical features can't be proven in terms of dates.

Guess it works fine for saint bones, though.

[KakistocracyHater]

31. uranium dating is superior

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archeology/dating/uranium_dating.html

http://www.archaeologyexpert.co.uk/ArchaeologicalDating.html

http://www.answers.com/topic/uranium-dating

& I might as well add here, it is about archaeology, that those sites in Peru that tested OLDER than Clovis is probably because there was an 'ice bridge' connecting Antarctica to the Horn of South America, & so there were incoming peoples from both North & South America. Athena Review has several issues about this.

[jazzjunkysue]

48. But Jonah lived ina whale for 900 years. THAT, we can be absolutely sure of.

I was there.

[NashVegas]

20. Dear DU Scathing Indictors: What Part of "Seems To" Confirm Offends You??

:shrug:

[Ian David]

25. "seems to confirm" should be "doesn't rule-out." n/t

[ozymandius]

21. I dunno 'bout that. The Tooth Fairy went missing around the same time.

:eyes:

[Dappleganger]

22. Cool beans.

[tom_paine]

23. One should always trust the Pope's scientific prowess.

After all, it only took 400 years for the Pope to acknowledge the Earth wasn't the center of the universe.

"Pick a Pope, any Pope, and I'll tell you what your Pope is..."

[Ian David]

24. It could also be anyone who lived at the same time as St. Paul.

I could claim my grandfather's bones are those of Hitler.

Pope Ratso not so big on the science.

[Cleita]

27. Wasn't he beheaded by the Romans because he was a Roman citizen?

Wouldn't a detached head be a clue?

[undeterred]

28. Apparently there are only bone fragments left

and not an entire skeleton. So yes I believe he was beheaded but I don't recall why. Maybe an angry mob of women.

[maglatinavi]

41. paul's decapitation

a woman???

[pattmarty]

29. I mean, who really gives a fuck??????

[Historic NY]

33. Where's the DNA?

[caseymoz]

35. That was my question. They don't have any DNA to compare it to.

I don't believe the entire proof offered was that they merely dated back to the first or second centuries. As has been seen before, the Vatican has a very low standard of evidence.

[Historic NY]

36. my middle name isn't Thomas for nothing.

[gtar100]

44. The DNA is important for possible cloning experiments

Start with a sheep and if it comes out all self-righteous and hateful towards female sheep, then it was St. Paul.

[NashVegas]

50. Considering Paul's Reputed Misogyny ...

Good luck.

[hollowdweller]

34. Always thought the veneration of relics was somewhat sick

The whole holy bones mojo thing the Catholic Church sort of had, well really the whole somewhat idol worshipping aspect of it was way off from the stuff Jesus or Paul laid down.

[undeterred]

38. Its pretty fascinating though..

Milk from the virgin mother... the foreskin of Jesus... interpreting the anatomy of someone's heart to have theological meaning... its a very interesting chapter in the history of religion.

3 types of relics:

3rd class relic being a piece of cloth or some material touched to the body of a saint/holy person

2nd class relic being something the saint/holy person wore or used exp. clothing, a crucifix.

1st class relic being a relic believed to belong to the Lord or the body part/body of a saint.

[dugaresa]

52. one thing that bothered me about the 1st class of relics

was that it seemed that some saints were just cut up in pieces so that enough churches could boast their body part counts.

Some churches have the hearts, the hands, the bowels of varying saints. All seems gross to me.

[provis99]

39. that'd be funny if it was actually a 2000 year old skeleton of a worshipper of Mitra

come on, they've got a 2000 year old skeleton, so that automatically makes it Paul? What a complete mockery the Catholic Church is.

[Slyder]

43. Circumstantial evidence......

won't stand up in court, but archeology is different. Yes, the bones are carbon-dated to the right era, and that hardly means they are St. Paul's. But the fact that they are where tradition says they should be and from a very early time those bones were venerated as those of Paul, is strong circumstantial evidence. Face it, at this point, if you opened a tomb of a Caesar or a Chinese emperor one could never prove the remains belongs to that person. Are we sure King Tut was buried in King Tut's tomb? DNA tests might prove that the remains found belonged to a male of the Jewish priestly caste (such a genetic marker has been found), which might make the evidence stronger. The Church is very careful about authenticating relics. The Shroud of Turin has never been declared genuine and countless "miracles" are dismissed every year.

I am not much of a believer, but I have always felt it takes as much faith to say there is no god as it does to say there is. Great crimes have been committed in the name of faith, but also great works of charity and love.

[rrneck]

54. Good post. Well said. nt

[IndianaGreen]

45. Do they have a DNA match to one of Paul of Tarsus's relatives? Of course not!

More religious mythology from the Vatican.

BTW, there is an exciting scene in the film previews of the upcoming film 2012 in which the Pope and all of his Cardinals are killed in a cataclysm. If it could only be true!

[DeSwiss]

49. "...seems to confirm... that they are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul."

- CORRECTION: Scientifically, the only thing they have shown is that these are the mortal remains of someone who lived in the first or second century.

[Why Syzygy]

51. They buried the remains of a PRISONER

in a sarcophagus located under the Basilica of St. Paul? I would assume prisoners got the potter's field. :shrug:

[rrneck]

53. Don't look now

but even as we speak Tom Hanks is rushing around Rome with a writer of pot boiler novels in a frantic effort prove that he is a direct descendant of the original author of Christianity.