Archeologists discover St. Paul's tomb

[August]

Pretty interesting, I wonder if any new scriptures will come to light with this.

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.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

The last verses in Revelation kinda seal the Bible shut. John says that those who add to or remove from the Bible will be punished.

[Deborah]

Yikes I wrote my name in mine

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Pardon?

[Deborah]

*sigh*

John says that those who add to or remove from the Bible will be punished

.

I said I wrote my name in mine

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

LOL! No no no, that's not what John meant. Example-you know the Mormos supposedly have a book from Gabriel which adds onto the Bible? That is an example of adding onto the Bible. Muhammed added the Koran to the Bible also (and then edited the Bible as well, which would be taking from it). (I'm assuming he edited the Bible...him or his followers...because the Bible disagrees with the Koran, so some verses would have to be removed, or deformed...) You can write in your Bible, because you're not adding onto it. You're just putting in your name or personal thoughts. In other words, don't try and change the meaning of the Bible, which is what adding or subtracting from it would do.

[Deborah]

LOL! No no no, that's not what John meant. Example-you know the Mormos supposedly have a book from Gabriel which adds onto the Bible? That is an example of adding onto the Bible. Muhammed added the Koran to the Bible also (and then edited the Bible as well, which would be taking from it). (I'm assuming he edited the Bible...him or his followers...because the Bible disagrees with the Koran, so some verses would have to be removed, or deformed...) You can write in your Bible, because you're not adding onto it. You're just putting in your name or personal thoughts. In other words, don't try and change the meaning of the Bible, which is what adding or subtracting from it would do.

lol no hun mahumad did not write the karan, it was writen 130 years after his death.

[Jac3510]

This would be interesting. I'm looking forward to see what comes of it, but I sincerely doubt it would be any new Scriptures. I would have to say in defense of the possibility that the canon being closed, and I believe it is, would not actually apply in this case. If Paul had written something else in his lifetime, then it is conceivable, based on its apostolic authority, that it could be considered Scripture. Where you would run into your problems would be in its lack of universal witness of the Church, so that might create some tough issues.

Regardless, though, minus any texts found on his person, the entire idea is moot, and if they had found something, I think the article would have mentioned it. Besides that, why would copies of his epistles be buried with him, and even if they were (which seems to me unlikely), doesn't this imply that they were known at the time of their death? If so, you have to contend with the fact that the letters were not recognized as Scripture in the first century, and that could be an insurmountable problem.

With all that said, if they can actually confirm the tomb is Paul's, it would just add that much more credibility to the NT. Dating methods would show him exactly in the time the Bible puts him. That would kill those silly theories about the Church coming into existence way later. If Paul existed and wrote in the first century, then so did Peter. Besides that, we have to account for Paul's prominence . . . if he did not write all the epistles ascribed to him by conservatives, what makes him so "special"? Yet, this tomb would clearly indicate that he was very, very popular. This would, then, certainly have bearing on the authorship of some epistles in question, which, in turn, points to the credibility of the other apostles (i.ae., his mentioning of Peter and James in Galatians). If these men are confirmed beyond doubt, then, it puts the unbeliever in a VERY difficult position regarding claims of legendary development, which should be considered dead even now, but aren't.

In other words, to stop all the rambling, if this can be confirmed, it does a lot to confirm the origins of the Christian church. That, in my mind, is a pretty big deal . . .

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

*Sigh* I KNEW that Muhammend's followers wrote the Koran...why in the world did I say he wrote it...He's the cause of it, though, he claimed to have been told or given something by Gabriel, and he started the relgion.

[August]

I should have worded this better, I should have said writings rather than scriptures. It will defintely be good validation of the NT, and I am hoping for something in writing or symbols in and around the tomb. I'm not sure that they would have said something already, due diligence needs to be thorough.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Oh, I thought you meant new scriptures, as in, John, the forgotten book or something. The Dead Sea Scrolls were used to see how much the Old testament changed over time (1000+ years) and they found the stuff was the same, except for 5% which resulted from spelling changes and I think pen slips (or whatever they wrote with).