>The Apostle Paul’s Remains – Again

>A news report from Rome says that the analysis conducted on the remains found in a tomb in Rome believed to be Paul’s body is not conclusive. The following is an excerpt from the news report:

ANSA) – Vatican City, July 3 – A recent scientific analysis on a tomb Vatican officials believe belongs to St Paul does not ”confirm or exclude” that the relics inside are those of the apostle, the head of the Vatican Museums’ diagnostics laboratory said Friday.

Speaking at a Vatican press conference Ulderico Santamaria, who is also a science professor at Tuscia University, said the analysis did not offer conclusive proof.

However, Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, archpriest of the basilica of St Paul’s Outside the Walls where the tomb was found in 2006, said the results made him optimistic.

”Nothing is contrary and everything seems to point towards the tomb being that of the apostle, in line with a 2,000-year tradition,” he said.

Pope Benedict XVI announced on Sunday that a probe inserted through a small hole in the tomb revealed pieces of purple and blue material, incense grains and small fragments of bone that were carbon dated to between the first and second century.

Although the Pope said that the tests “confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that these are the mortal remains of Paul the apostle,” it is doubtful that a definite identification is possible with the evidence available to archaeologists.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share var addthis_pub = ‘claude mariottini’;

This entry was posted in Archaeology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to >The Apostle Paul’s Remains – Again

  1. Anonymous says:

    >Hello Professor,Actually what the Pope said was:''This seems to confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that these are the mortal remains of Paul the apostle,''Your quote leaves out the qualifying aspect of his statement.Pax,John

    Like

  2. >John,Thank you for the correction. Even with the qualifying words in the statement, what I wrote in my post stands: we may never know for sure whether the remains are the actual remains of Paul.Claude Mariottini

    Like

  3. >To Anonymous,Thank you for the link. It is an interesting review of Davies' minimalist views.Claude Mariottini

    Like

  4. Anonymous says:

    >"Even with the qualifying words in the statement, what I wrote in my post stands: we may never know for sure whether the remains are the actual remains of Paul."Hello Professor,Of course, I totally agree. Even if they ran DNA tests that proved the person was of Jewish decent. It wouldn't be proof positive.Though it would seem to confirm the tradition.Pax,John

    Like

  5. Anonymous says:

    >Excuse me,that should read: "Jewish descent."Pax,John

    Like

  6. >John,Do not worry about mistakes like that. I make them all of the time and my readers are very forgiving when it comes to my mistakes.As they saying goes: "to err is human, to forgive divine"Claude Mariottini

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.