The skeletons were not Christian. Christianity did not spread to Rome until after the first century. As is true for many or most of the catacomb burials, the skeletons were very likely Jewish. Rome had an immense Jewish population before and after the destruction of Jewish independence in ancient Israel in the year 70.

Christian W.

What an ignorant comment.

Forget about peter and paul and every ancient historian (including pagan roman ones like tacitus and ceutonis) who confirmed the existance A: Of a distinct people who worshiped christ as a god called Christians and B: That they were in the capital of the empire (Rome).

Also, I wonder how Clement of Rome would have felt being told by a 21st century ignoramus that he wasn't the christian bishop of rome around 80 ad. And of course, Cyprian, Tertullian, Iraneous, Ignatious, Polycarp and all the other PRE Constantine bishops and apologists for Christianity who comitted to paper their Christian faith and belief in the divinity of Christ prior to constantine. Only people who think The Davinci Code is true history actually believe Constantine invented the divinity of Christ. It was only the nature of the divinity that was discussed at Nicea

Hmmmm. As I recall, history tells us that the catacombs were built by Christians as Christian burial grounds. Under Roman law, the bodies of the Christian dead could be placed in catacombs without fear of being disturbed.

I don't know for sure where these wild tales of Christianity not existing until the first century came from, but I have a sneaking suspicion that someone has been learning their history lessons from "The DaVinci Code."

As for Tim, perhaps you can explain why Paul felt he was just a jew discussing jewish issues within judaism when it was jews persecuting him for his beliefs in Christ and expelling him from synagogues where he preached.

Paul did not consider himself a Christian????
Really?

Acts of the Apostles - Chapter 26

28 And Agrippa said to Paul: In a little thou persuadest me to become a Christian. 29 And Paul said: I would to God, that both in a little and in much, not only thou, but also all that hear me, this day, should become such AS I ALSO AM, except these bands. 30 And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them.

but then again... that's the Catholic version, not the Davinci code version.

Tell that to St. Peter and St. Paul. Apparently they didn't know they were supposed to wait until after the first centurty to spread the New Covenant.

John P.

No Christians in Rome prior to 100 AD? Ouch!!! St Paul's largest and most profoundly theological letter was written by him to the already well estblished church in Rome sometime between 56 and 57 AD. He was also martyred there in or about 64 AD. St Peter (Rome's first bishop) was martyred there as well. So much for the observations of Christian of Palo Alto.

Jim S.

Friends,

Paul did not consider himself a Christian, and he would have been horrified to have been considered anything BUT a Jew. Jesus and His followers were all Jews, and the debates were about Judaism itslef, NOT a new religion. Christianity as a seperate religion CANNOT be considered to develop, per se, until Constantine identified it as such.

Paul's own letters and teachings were based upon his epiphany that strict dietary codes, circumcision and Jewish birth were not the basis of Judaism, and that it was possible for "gentiles" to become Jews without these things.

Paul was a Jew. His audiences were Jews and Gentiles who wanted to become Jews, and other interested parties.

It's quite possible that those skeletons were Jews who died or escaped Nero's purges of Jews. It's also possible they belonged to some other Roman cult.

Regardless, they were certainly NOT Christians, at least not in any way that we would recognize that term today. Then, they would have considered themselves Jews, or, at most, a branch of Judaism.

Christianity did in fact spread to Rome on more than one occassion during the first century. The apostle Paul was in prison for two years there and released. During that time, people had free access to him as he held studies. Many were converted until later he was put back and in prison and beheaded. The book of Romans is an epistle to the Christians that lived in Rome. The Apostle Peter also died in the area by being crucified upside down.

It will be interesting to discover to what degree these palpable facts support or contradict biased myths. ;^)

I can't believe what I read in these posts! I guess I'm not aware of how "ignorant" our society really is about Christianity and History. ..."Christians not existing until after 100A.D.", "the Da Vinci Code", and the person who said Paul was not a Christian (that is, a "CHRIST-ian"). Where are the wise anymore? Where are the people who speak intelligence? Read People before you speak!! Quit throwing-up and mixing your lame opinions and beliefs into historical truth.

It's fascinating and rather sad that Tim's comments have diverted us from an otherwise exciting discussion by his injection of a silly red herring. For those not familiar with Tim's mindset and the theology that goes with it, bear with me while I take a stab.

Jews who convert to Christianity have always maintained consciousness of their roots. Let's face it! Everyone who becomes a Christian maintains consciousness of his/ her roots. The world is full of ethnic churches that outsiders often find very hard to adapt themselves to.

The modern "messianic" movement is no exception. Jews become believers in Jesus and their religious and social gatherings take on a distinctly Jewish ethnic flavour. Many choose to use hebraicized vocabulary rather than the Greek-based terminology common to mainline Christianity. Most messianics refer for example to "Yeshua", rather than the hellenized "Jesus".

Historically, Jewish converts have had no problem reconciling the Old Testament with the New Testament and seeing both testaments in line with the key doctrines of Christianity. Moshe Rosen (founder of Jews for Jesus) is a case in point.

However, the messianic movement (and even the term "messianic") has in recent years been largely hijacked and splintered in all directions by persons who see traditional Christianity as nothing better than a product of paganism. Likewise they set forth as the true standards of the faith of the Messiah what they imagine to be the beliefs and practice of the very early Jerusalem church.

The various "messianic" splinters normally have a few things in common. One, the membership is primarily made up of wannabe Jews of gentile extraction; Two, they tend to deny such basic tenets of the Christian faith as belief in the Trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ; Three, they are zealous to observe the minutiae of the Old Testament Law; Four, they are normally stickl

A lot of you are saying that there were no 'christians' in Rome prior to Constantine establishing 'christianity' as a religion in 300 ad. You are getting confused between Catholicism and Christianity which are two completely different religions, Christianity was alive and well and spreading throughout the near and far east and well through Europe before 100ad Catholicism was only created around 300ad by Constantine and was created as a way to keep his multi-religous armies in order, hence the name Catholic which means 'universal religion'.

Here we go again with the "Catholics aren't Christians" argument...

Yawnn...

It is possible that these people were killed during Nero's reign beginning in AD 66. History records that Nero was a cruel, murderous tyrrant. He poisoned his son, Britannicus; cut open his mother, Agrippina, so that he could see where he had been formed in her womb; had his wife Octavia killed with a sword because she was barren; and Seneca, his faithful teacher, he had poisoned & bled to death. Desiring to see a fire as powerful as the burning of Troy, he ordered that Rome be set on fire, and then ascended a certain tower to watch it burn while he sang "Troy is on fire". When the Romans angrily arose against him, he blamed it on the Christians, as they were called by the common folk. He ordered that anyone who confessed to be a Christian should be immediately apprehended, tortured & put to death. Most were killed in one of four ways. First, skins of wild animals were tied upon them so that they would be torn to pieces by dogs or other wild animals. Secondly, many were killed on crosses. Thirdly, hundreds were burned at the stake, or tortured with burning torches under the arms or other parts of the body until they succombed to death. Forthly, Nero had many of them wrapped in mantles of paper or linen; thickly covered in pitch, tallow, rosin, sulphur & wax and used as giant burning torches to light up the night sky. He had them "posted" in his gardens during Circusian games and proudly rode or stood in his chariot to watch them burn. Juvenal & Martial, both Roman poets, and Tertullian state that he did this because he wanted to melt the very marrow of their bones. The bodies of the Christians were then gathered up by their families & loved ones and given Christian burials to honor those who were martyred for their faith.These tortures & murders continued until Nero's death. At this time in history, people who were followers of the teachings of Christ were simply called "christians" (meaning.. people who beli

Id like to comment on the erroneous comments about Israel & Judah They are 12 seperate tribes! Judah (the "jews") are not and do not represent ALL of the seed of Israel. Judah is and is still only 1/12th
of Israel as a whole. I know its been said that way for so long that it has become accepted as truth but it is not. Historically, spiritually or otherwise. Please IF it interests you to seek HIStory in a deepful and truthful manner click the link on my web site ,The only item on that link is the most wonderfull book.
And by the way about Paul? He was not from the tribe of judah but a Benjamite !
Paul states in -
Romans 11:1- I say then has God cast away His people? God forbid,For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the seed of Benjamin.

I amNOT arguing that there where no Christians in Rome in the first century AD

However, a few of points:

"You are getting confused between Catholicism and Christianity which are two completely different religions,"
- Catholicism is an organised form of Christianity.

"As for Tim, perhaps you can explain why Paul felt he was just a jew discussing jewish issues within judaism when it was jews persecuting him for his beliefs in Christ and expelling him from synagogues where he preached."
- for the same reasons that "heretical" Christians felt/feel that they were/are Christians while being persecuted by "orthodox" Christian organisations.

It is sad that some people take a work of historical fiction (The Da Vinci Code) to be fact.

However .....

"Acts of the Apostles - Chapter 26

28 And Agrippa said to Paul: In a little thou persuadest me to become a Christian. 29 And Paul said: I would to God, that both in a little and in much, not only thou, but also all that hear me, this day, should become such AS I ALSO AM, except these bands. 30 And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them."

.... it is equally sad that even more people think that they can use their own religious treatise (The Bible) to support the veracity their religion's place in hisory. Paul says that someone said "x" so it must be the case. The book must be truthful because it is the word of God. Who says it is the word of God? The book does. So the 'evidence' is based on the arguement 'The book must be truthful because the book says it is truthful'.

How simple it is to weave a fiction around historical fact and have people insist on its truth because it contains historical fact.

Finally - " Where are the wise anymore? Where are the people who speak intelligence? Read People before you speak!! "

"Where are the wi

J.D Flack appears to be another ignorant Da Vinci Code sucker. The "Catholic" Church was an invention of Constantine, you say? There are numerous writings from the early Church Fathers that mention the Catholic Church. Not to mention there has been an unbroken line of popes (bishop of Rome) since St. Peter. Here's a couple of quotes from the Fathers:

"...a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said." (Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 10, 175 AD)

"Cyprian to [Pope] Cornelius, his brother. Greeting. . . . We decided to send and are sending a letter to you from all throughout the province [where I am] so that all our colleagues might give their decided approval and support to you and to your communion, that is, to both the unity and the charity of the Catholic Church" (Letters 48:1, 3 [A.D. 253]).

Hi. I enjoyed reading the diverse, and most quite good responses to this issue. One question I have is, "If one seeking truth of God's love, and eternal salvation, read these comments, and the names some spoke of/to other commentators with, would they be drawn to the AWESOME SON OF GOD, OUR SAVIOUR, JESUS/JESHUA?" The One who is Truth did not tear any true seeker down. He shared the Way. "THE GREATEST OF THESE IS LOVE..."

God bless you - every one! :)

It's funny how quick everyone is to blame the Da Vinci Code for people having different opinions about the bodies found in the catacombs.

There were some Christians and Jews living in Rome obvilously because Rome was conquring half of the world. Christians were persecute up until Constantine proclaimed Christianity to be the countries religion. There was a split in the church between the Eastern and the Orthodox. Both groups attacked each other all in the name of god. How silly is that. Yes around 1bc-1ad christians would meet in catacombs to practice their religion. NO they didn't build the catacombs. They were built as poppers graves.

To jump to the claim that these people are Christian is premature there were many cults coming across the Aegan. And yes and that time Christianity was considered a cult so just deal with it.

The Da Vinci code is a great book, we do Christians feel the need to taint everything. You want everyone to acknowledge your god while you have no respect for other religions. It's very childish. The bible is just like a greek myth. It's got great drama, stories of lust and betrayal, murder and genocide but it's only a myth.

there is no proof that Catholism exist before Constantine became King.

It's rather ridiculous that you have to slur names to prove your point. It doesn't work. If you are a true intellect you should just state your case.

THE DIVCI CODE IS A GREAT BOOK.
Let me guess if you had your way you'd burn it.
Just like the crusades. That's how fanatical Christians act, there now I have stooped to your level.

Interesting find to say the least. A question to ponder: If the Christians were considered the poor, then wny the elegant dress? Could the find, somehow be of a totally different find, lets' say, another group of individuals that were conquered, captured, and sent to memorium as a signal not to defie Roman law?

Comrades,

My oh My... I should have come back earlier but real-world work has kept me a tad busy.

Let's see here: Well, I really can't understand where the reference to the "Davinci Code" fits into my comments. Certainly nothing I said was based upon it.

My comments are thus: Paul was a Jew. he considered himself a Jew. He viewed the world as being either Jew or Gentile.

Not ONCE, in ANY of his works, does he refer to himself as a "Christian". Only in later copies, especially the NEB (New English Bible) is Christianity and the word "Christian" projected onto his works.

It is easy to look back to the 1st century with the crytal view of hindsight and say that "Christians" were living in Rome in the 1st Century. However, that is not how they perceived themselves. They thought of themselves as Jews, or Gentiles adopting Judaism, that Paul's message was an interpretation of Judaism, and nothing more.

Paul was not establishing a new religion. He was preaching that the end times were fast approaching, and that Jesus had shown how to prepare for them.

Them's the facts. Read Paul's own works again if you need to, especially in the Greek if you can find it. It's amazing how very different his actual words are from those attributed to him in modern English translations, especially those with an agenda to support.

I'd be happy to post footnotes to those who need them.

Tautology and semantics.

Does sharing Abrahamic origins make Muslims Jews also?

This is just pure propaganda. Who says they were persecuted? where is the hard evidence that these people were persecuted? And I dont mean quotes from classical texts written by Christians.

Interesting Headline regardless of the debate taking place.

Marcus & Audrey- AMEN & AMEN!!!

Christina- The Da Vinci Code is a fictional writing/story by a man who is not a historian nor sought historians. He simply wrote an interesting (to some, blashpemous to others) story. I'm not here to debate this book but rather show a differing view of sensativity.

God Bless you all!

In theis debate, or what ever, Tim is correct, and im many way it is Paul that is responsible for teh hijacking of the message that Yeshua we making, which was mainly that the Jews had to return to the old beliefs and get rid of such as the paid for sacrifices (the money lenders scene at the temple) and such. Yeshua in no way met the prophetic requirements to be the messiah, but he WAS one of a long line of refomers in the Jewish faith. Paul with his "bright idea" that you didn't have to follow the talmudic laws as to what made a Jew, but then could follow Yeshua's "Jedeoism lite" and have one god instead of many and use the old testament as a base did have appeal to some people.
It is also worth point out, that at the time of Yeshua (Jesus) there were many men in that area of the "holy land" all proclaiming themselves to be the messiah, with varing sucess in attracting followers. It is true that most were political and were openly advocating the over throw of the Roman rule (and Rome's pupet Herod) Paul can in many ways be considered the worlds first "spin doctor" or "public relation hack" and by watering down the Jewish base of Yeshua's message made it more attractive to the masses (after all what sane grown uncircumscized male is going to want to do that one ?)
If it was not for Paul and his messing with the message Christianity would still just be a an offshoot of the Jewish faith and not the "shove my religion down your throat to 'save'you" that we have to suffer today.

Some good discussion.
1) Pursecution was an on/off thing, changing not only with Roman rulers but different from region to region. Example, a letter by Tiberious telling one of his regional governers to leave the Christians alone. (to the best of my recollection from reading a book covering the history of the emperors from Agustus to ?).
2) Hard to put a toga on a barbequed bod.
3) It is my studied opinion (I can be wrong) that what we think of as Christianity (especially that Yeshua was some Hurcules-like or Roman Emperor son of a god or that Jesus was to be worshiped) is unfortunately yes, a later development. I belive that you can see that yourself by reading the "New Testament" books in order of their generally accepted dates.
I don't mean to claim I'm absolutely right and might not change my mind some day, but that is the most reasonable conclusion I find from study. Again, read the earliest stuff (letters) and see if you find your religion in them. Ask yourself, what is missing that you are actually assuming is there? Is this more than following a good man who now sits at the right hand of god? All the kings were 'annointed ones' so David too was a Christ, yes? No? Feel free to disagree, I can be wrong. I had a good web link on ages of the docs but lost it! Keep in mind -- look at the age of the docs not the dates of the supposed "event" in them. (experts disagree on exact dates using even ranges tells you a lot) Most people think the Gospels came first -- no it was the letters.
What really bugs me, is that since Christianity came from earlier roots, that some gnostic or pagan religion would be good to adopt -- even if true, those folks were not always a fun bunch. Things are not always secret because they are valuable or important at all in the modern world. Stupid ideas and pointless mystical nonsense is also secret. Keep an open mind but not so much that your brain falls out.

To clarify a couple things. Like anyone cares. :-)
If you've only seen the stupid Hercules movies, Hercules was worshiped very seriously for centuries; Son of Zeus yet all human. (Familiar? no? 12 tasks? Why 12 all the time?) EVERYONE important was a son of god or a god. The emperor was Son of Zeus. Alexander was son of some god. And you were pretty much a nobody if you were Mythra, Orpheus, Osirus, Innana, so on if you hadn't gone to the underworld and snatched the keys from it's ruler and come back from the dead.

So Innana spend 9 days in the underworld (from some 4,000 yr old cuniform) and Jesus 3 -- get over it folks. I say this in the kindest way I can think of: Grow the f*** up! :-) Sorry but you need a friend to pull the bandaid off quickly. People don't fly (wait, that's Harry Potter, sorry), rise themselves or others from the dead, walk on water, turn water to wine* . These are myths found in every cyclical agracultural society. What do you think the Osiris story was?

*(although grape vines do: Rain to Grapes. Crush the grapes and you get the 'blood' of THAT which turned water in to wine.) See Dionysus aka Bacchus. I challenge you to find one of the many Son of Zeus daugher of a human who was not dead and reborn.

The Jews/Gentiles who followed the ways of Jesus reguarded themselves as followers of the way. This was a branch of Judeasim. The term Christian was used as an insult! (Not so any more). Constantine was only trying to pacify the masses by demanding that Christianity was the national religion. Loads of folk being followers of the way by that time.
K

A very interesting find in Rome. At the moment it is pure speculation as to who they were or how they died etc. Time tell tell, well time will give us a better guess as to who they were etc. An educated guess if you like, but a guess none the less. Interesting indeed.

As to all the arguments about Christianity, come on people the bible (new testiment) is one of the most altered, edited and added to book ever written.

But know knows maybe the bible is an exact historical document. Or maybe Jesus spent those missing years in India in search of the lost tribes of the Jews and became a Buddhist? Who knows?!

try exploring this............
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm

this find was not a discussion of what you think about christianity. but, about the FIND. i only have this to say. many know "about " JESUS or YESHUA, but do not know "HIM".-- I thank GOD that i DO know "HIM.". as a person , and not just a title. and when that happens to YOU, then the argument is over. may HE bless you all.

THIS IS FROM THE ABOVE LINK......
It is very telling that the earliest Christian documents, the Epistles attributed to "Paul," never discuss a historical background of Jesus but deal exclusively with a spiritual being who was known to all gnostic sects for hundreds to thousands of years. The few "historical" references to an actual life of Jesus cited in the Epistles are demonstrably interpolations and forgeries, as are, according to Wheless, the Epistles themselves, as they were not written by "Paul." Aside from the brief reference to Pontius Pilate at 1 Timothy 6:13, an epistle dated ben Yehoshua to 144 CE and thus not written by Paul, the Pauline literature (as pointed out by Edouard Dujardin) "does not refer to Pilate, or the Romans, or Caiaphas, or the Sanhedrin, or Herod, or Judas, or the holy women, or any person in the gospel account of the Passion, and that it also never makes any allusion to them; lastly, that it mentions absolutely none of the events of the Passion, either directly or by way of allusion." Dujardin additionally relates that other early "Christian" writings such as Revelation do not mention any historical details or drama. Mangasarian notes that Paul also never quotes from Jesus's purported sermons and speeches, parables and prayers, nor does he mention Jesus's supernatural birth or any of his alleged wonders and miracles, all which one would presume would be very important to his followers, had such exploits and sayings been known prior to "Paul."

If memory serves, Paul wasn't Jewish. I believe he was a hired hand of the Romans persecuting followers of Christ before his epiphany on the road to Damascus.

Other than to address obvious heresy I do not understand why people like to argue other than to say: "Well, I am better than you!" which, of course, is not true. You are as valuable to God as I or any other. It is my understanding that the roots of the word "religion" means to bind up (referring to some kind of bondage). For me it's a delight when one asks me "What religion are you?" To which I am also happy to reply, "I am not into religion (and I am a member of an established and recognized church) but I am into a relationship with the Lord of Lords and King of all Kings; in fact, I talked with Him this morning." So I respect your comments but why argue? Let's show lots of love and honor for each other. Thank you.

The Kristi movement began as fanatical apocalyptic assassins who managed to establish a cult within a city that was multiculturally diverse and open to suggestion. What began as response to Rome's assault upon Judea, ended with a universal new world order with a religion permeated within Western european traditions. Perhaps these toga cadavers will reveal some interest in history from a different perspective rather than the official doctrinal understandings within academia or the occult and mystic traditions.

Alfred Holden,

"The Kristi movement began as fanatical apocalyptic assassins".

True, but when you realise that the Greek work Kristos could be used interchangably with the term 'Messiah', it becomes a little more complicated.

Josephus' list of possible messiahs shows us that there were two separate understandings of what the messiah should be amongst the Jews of the 1st century AD.

"Some people were looking forward to a military leader who would defeat the Seleucid or Roman enemies and establish an independent Jewish kingdom; others, like the author of the Psalms of Solomon, stated that the Messiah was a charismatic teacher who gave the correct interpretation of Mosaic law, was to restore Israel and would judge mankind" (courtesy of Livius.org)

The Kristi movement referred to above would fit into the first understanding of what the messiah should be, whist Jesus fits with the alternative understanding of what the messiah should be.

The fact that the 'Kristi movement' you refer to may have been a reality does not stand in opposition to the reality of Jesus Christ and the early Christian church. The Jewish people had a five hundred or more year old tradition of the messiah and many people were hailed as the messiah by people who saw them, rightly or wrongly, as the answer to their problems.

On and on and on and on and on!

In other words, don't automatically take as fact everything you read on the Internet.

"The fact that the skeletons were dressed in expensive togas is very unusual and would point to the fact that we are talking about the upper classes of ancient Rome."

It would be beyond the wildest dreams of Christian historians if there were that many upper class Christians during the first century. In fact, despite Christian tradition regarding Paul and the preaching at Rome, there is no other hard, scientific evidence of a Christian presence in Rome during the first century.

These skeletons may belong to Jews or Mithraists.

Unfortunately Timothy's link contains much erroneous material.
Without taking it apart piece by piece here and now I think it should be sufficient to say that the Jewish historian Joseph Ben Mathias, otherwise known as Flavius Josephus, writing during the riegn of the Roman emperor Vespasian (properly called Titus Flavius Vespasianus - ruled AD69 - 79), lists Jesus amongst his list of possible cantidates for identification as the actual messiah. This list can be found as a chapter of his work 'Jewish Antiquities'. Each of the possible 'messiahs', all of whom had lived in the seventy years or so prior to the writing of Josephus' work, is described, along with the reasons he was suggested as being the messiah. Most of these men were claimed to be the messiah within their own lifetimes.

Of Jesus, Josephus has this to say:

"At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out."
[Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, 18.63-64]

Accusations of Jesus' details being made up by his followers do not apply here as Josepus was not a christian.

Allen,

The Bible should properly be seen as an anthology rather than a single book, as it is made up of a large number of books, many of which run for only a few pages. As these books were written over a period of several hundred years up until the late 1st century AD it is hardly surprising that many of the earlier books show internal evidence of modification by later generations. This practice seems to have been particularly prevalent during the period immediately following the Jews' return from Babalon and again during the period of Hellenistic dominance during the third and second centuries BC. It is true that modern printings of the Bible do vary as to how many of the books they contain, but this is mainly due to a group of 22 books, collectively known as 'the Apocrapha' which is often held to be separate to the rest of the Bible, with the result that sometimes none of them are included and sometimes several of them are included. It is rare, but a few printings do contain the entire Apocrapha. The books of the Apocrapha all date to before Christ and it is likely that the Jewish leadership decided, on being repatriated to Judea due to the breakup of the Babalonian empire, that they needed to select their most important texts to keep together in one place so that they could carry them all together if they ever went into exile again, rather than some being left behind. The origin of the Apocrapha may by that these 22 books were the ones that almost gained a place in the box of essentials but didn't quite make the cut.

Tim,

I think Mickey has demonstrated by citing the King James translation of the Bible that Pauls identification with Christ and Christianity predates the New English Bible translation. I wonder, what do you base your assertion on? Have you read Paul's letters in their original Greek?

Allen,

" I challenge you to find one of the many Son of Zeus daugher of a human who was not dead and reborn."

H

Suchee,

It is almost impossible that the bodies in the catacombe (which is what this thread is supposed to be about) could have been Mithraists. The Persian god Mithras only really started making inroads into the Roman world in the early second century AD, initially in the Legio IV Macadonica (4th Legion), which was stationed in the east and would have had regular contact with the Persians. Mithras' spread to the west was probably due to the transfer of army officers, which may also explain why in the west it was mainly popular with army officers.

Despite the often repeated assertion that Christianity was mainly attractive to the poor, there are a number of well attested Christians who were by no means poor. It is also obvious from reading a number of ancient historians that by the mid AD60s there was a thriving Christian population in Rome. Nero could not have blamed the fire of Rome on an obscure group no-one had ever heard of.

As far as the bodies being victims of Nero's persecution, as Allen said above, it would be hard to dress a burned corpse in a toga (I say this having actually worn a full sized replica of a toga). The same would apply to a dismembered corpse. If they were in fact dressed in togas (as opposed to the writer of the article using the term 'toga' indiscriminately) it would indicate that they had been buried peacefully and intact, suggesting death by natural causes of some sort. Also, were all the bodies dressed in the same type of toga. There were several styles and even poor people were expected to wear the toga on at least some occasions if they were citizens.

I'm with Alex - all the way.

I have rarley witnessed such waste of time and space of people chattering on about a spurious semantic arguement.

The history is irrelevant - if you believe you believe - if you don't - you don't - when a movement was given a title is of no consequence .. it is the essence that is important. To learn to love all and everything equally. Whether you are Jew, Hindu, Bhuddist, Christian., Muslim; it matters little. What is in your heart - now there is another matter altogether.

The aqncients taught us where to be, The words of Jesus tell us how and why. What is your proble people???

In peace and light my friends and may the one true God by whatever name you choose to call Him, protect and guide you - and please don't forget to kind to your neighbour and respectful of his opinion - it maty not be yours - but it may not be wrong - and could well learn from it further develop your own sprituality.

History can be viewed as an excuse for avoiding the truth.

There is only one ultimate truth - call it what you like

May your God go with you by whatever name you call Him

We are all Gods'children we have to live in peace. Look at what people have done in the name of God
from those times to now. Nothing much has changed. How about thinking about ending world poverty, hunger, war & all the other problems that
we have. That makes more sence than banging on about who is right & who is wrong. From
what I have read you are all intellegent people don't waste time dewlling on all of this move on.

The Da Vinci code is just food for thought & something to entertain take it as that.

Keep life simple folks. Just live & love everyone & everything. We are on this earth to evolve in to higher beings.

PS my key board is playing up excuse the
gaps.