http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6219656.stm

I find it interesting, that although science continually decries religion and "proves" that its mere superstition, that finds like this are so incredibly spiritual.

Also intensely suspect.

Most Holy Land archeology is controlled by Right wing fundamentalist sects, the Roman Catholic Church or the Israeli government. None of the about have a vested interest in 'science' or 'fact'

In the case of Paul, there is no objective evidence of his martyrdom, or even his death. The dating of the Crypt is unlikely to antedate Constantine's reign, or the council of Nicea. Eusebius, student of Pamphillus, student of Polycarp, was a heavy duty Pauline Christianity follower, as were his teacher and his teacher's teacher. When Eusebius (the only other literate man at Nicea, other than Constantine) got the ear of the emperor, the die was cast. There then followed a bloody expiration of rival versions of Christianity (which had always been the case... it was the real reason the Romans largely disliked Christians... they kept killing each other, causing riots and not paying taxes)went from being a cottage industry to Imperial Decree (and became a lot more efficient) It's all in the public domain, if you know where to look. It's not something that the Church (in any of it's sects) encourages one to do, however.

A good does of history somewhat abrogates my feeling faith in much...

<< Most Holy Land archeology is controlled by Right wing fundamentalist sects, the Roman Catholic Church or the Israeli government >>

The tomb is in Rome !

Paul did exist, so he must have died and been buried somewhere. The last place he was known to be was in Rome. The last recorded event in his life was his second trial, before the assessors in Rome, for holding a dangerous and illegal superstition. The possible penalty was decapitation, but Paul's fate was not recorded.

Archeologists are often uncovering evidence of Biblical events, but as the Bible is partly a record historical events this is no surprise. People might choose to disbelieve the spiritual side of it, but the rest is a matter of fact. The walls of Jericho did fall, King David did rule, Jesus did claim to be the Messiah and was crucified, and Paul did travel and preach the gospel. Josephus (circa 37 - 100) is one good source of reference.

I've certainly not met anyone in the Christian Church who discourages research. Quite contrary really.

I know... i was pointing out that usually the Jesuits control that kind of thing... they even have an Astronomy division involved in SETI...

I don't trust anything involving special interest groups, especially when they're pandering to their imaginary friend (who's not called 'Bob')

The RCC control the site and will control any findings.

I mentioned that their Papal reach extends to Lebanon and beyond!

There's not much evidence that Jesus was crucified outside of the Gospels, and Matthew (who ever he was) made the mistake of reading a Greek translation of the Torah to try and retrofit Prophecy. It's pretty widely known...

When faith and history collide, history tends to be the loser.

I'd respectfully suggest you try reading the history your self...

One Baptist Minister (now Unitarian humanist who attends Episcopalian [Anglican to us Brits]) who did and found that The Son of Man isn't so well historically based is Bob Price.

"Incredible Shrinking Son of Man"

"Deconstructing Jesus"

are both pretty good places to start if you don't want to pander to your presuppositions

or for Biblical history, using mostly the RCC's own records

"Misquoting Jesus"
"Lost Christianities"
"Lost Scriptures"

By Bart D. Ehrman

are pretty good starting points. This has been a hobby of mine for a long time (dating back to getting a beating aged 5 for denying the virgin birth... I wasn't sure how babies WERE made, but I knew they didn't happen like that... I also knew stars didn't move and people weren't sent back to the their town of birth for taxation, even by a bureaucracy like the Romans...)

<<< There's not much evidence that Jesus was crucified >>>

As thousands WERE cricified - for far less crimes than claiming to be the Messiah - I suspect that he was !!!

<<< I also knew stars didn't move >>>

Didn't I see a documentary a couple of years back claiming that some kind of comet WAS sighted in that area at about that time? The claim also said that the comet moved from the Mesopotamia area towards Palestine???

If God is a myth, there's no harm in people believing in him if it keeps them happy.

If he's real, you'll meet him some day, and he'll give you all the answers you don't want.

Meantime, I have read the history, but with an open mind.

There was a possible return of Halley in the time frame but since the time frame is about 8 (4BC to 4AD) years (if you take other Jesus myths 130 years) it was more likely a planetary conjunction...

However, none move fast enough to be appear to be moving to an earth bound observer. Also remember that 'Shepherds were watching flocks by night', so it would have been spring time not winter...

But you have to admit, the tax thing is dumb... current thought is that it was to fulfil the line of David prophecy and gloss over the fact tat Jesus was from a pretty nasty part of the Holy land. If Nazareth existed as a town at the time... there's no good evidence it did, but when it did it was like coming form the rough end of Brixton.

If the Christian God is in charge, I'll take Hell.

And it keeps them happy and prepared to kill, which is what the Empire wanted. something that people would kill for and promised jam tomorrow for following the rules.

The Cat wrote:
If God is a myth, there's no harm in people believing in him if it keeps them happy.

If he's real, you'll meet him some day, and he'll give you all the answers you don't want.

Meantime, I have read the history, but with an open mind.

Very good point - you wouldn't want to upset Thor now would you?

To Thor... that hair with that hammer? nonononono...

<<< it was like coming form the rough end of Brixton >>>

Well, you'd hardly expect him to come from Kensington, would you? Didn't he say something like "you would always find him with the poor and down-trodden"?

As for the tax situation - well, it may be unusual, but these things do happen (with loony governments - just take today for example !) (We are not setting a time-scale for leaving Iraq - but we'll have left by Jan 2008 !!!!!!!!!!!!)

I'll look into the Nazareth situation, but I've a feeling that recent archeological discoveries prove that it has been around for an awful long time (or am I thinking of Carpernia?)

I have looked into the Nazareth situation briefly myself, and it all seems very inconclusive.

There's nothing like religion to get us all talking though, is there?

Personally, I stopped believing at about the same time I stopped believing in Santa Claus. If I'm honest, I wish this wasn't the case. Not a pleasant thought that we live and learn, then die and forget it all for eternity. Best avoided, I find.

Very interesting stuff. It has occured to me that despite what I otherwise thought, there is in fact no dividing line between religion and politics after all.
Therefore the truely agnostic do not vote either.
advocate.

I also prefer not to look at these things from a religious perspective (although everyone is welcome to their religious beliefs as long as they keep them to themselves) - think of it more as a historical journey.

The Secret Family of Jesus
On: Channel 4 (4)
Date: Monday 25th December 2006
Time: 20:00 to 22:00 (2 hours long)

Jesus, Mary and Joseph? Or Jesus, Mary, Joseph, James, Joses, Judas, Simeon, Salome and Mary jnr? Leading theologian Robert Beckford tells the story of the conspiracy that Dan Brown missed in The Secret Family of Jesus. It's the story of the people who shared his bloodline and knew him best, and who existed for at least 300 years after his death.

Martin wrote:
Very interesting stuff. It has occured to me that despite what I otherwise thought, there is in fact no dividing line between religion and politics after all.
Therefore the truely agnostic do not vote either.
advocate.

Politics, like faith, is opinion propped up by emotion.

The Dypsosyni were the 'hereditary' Bishops (Pontiffs) of Jerusalem. They weren't invited to Nicea and were placed under the control of Church in Byzantium. When they turned up at Constantinople to petition Constantine over both slights, they were greeted by some no-mark Bishop who said that the Emperor would NOT see them and sent them home. Strange to say, not one arrived... There was then an extended campaign to wipe out the Dypsosyni

The reason... They claimed to be related to Jesus, through James. This is a clear threat alone. Also they denied Jesus was more than a teacher. Double threat.

In the Gospel of Thomas (that WAS a part of the collection that became the New Testament, but was thrown out by Irenaeus) Jesus tells the disciples that, when he is gone they go to James for guidance. Not Peter, who Jesus seems to regard as a moron. Thus the Dysposyni were a clear political threat to the power of the Church of Rome, so the Early Christians, supported by the might of Holy Rome, did what they did best... absolutely, positively, wiped out every mother in the room. All the while destroying every copy they could lay their hands of Thomas and a bunch of other documents that contradicted the 'Jesus as God' idea that Constantine wanted and Eusebius supplied... a religion to control and defend an Empire.

Obviously stuff falls into the cracks so we have a lot of the texts they wanted destroyed,but, TBH, the translators have largely done both a biased and dry job of 'publicising' the non-canonical material... although that is changing. We only got complete texts post 1948, and more accessible translations are becoming available (The Gospel of Judas became a best seller and isn't badly translated or commented upon from a reading perspective). This is thanks to Dan Brown, in no small part, even though the Da Vinci Code is pretty much fiction.