No, They Have Not Found John the Baptist’s Bones

And I can say that without hesitation because there’s NO WAY they could  – short of an inscription in an undisturbed grave-  know who’s bones they are.  It’s just another overblown silly claim appearing in the press because with its 24 hour news cycle they have to ‘report’ something.

A small handful of bones found in an ancient church in Bulgaria may belong to John the Baptist, the biblical figure said to have baptized Jesus.

There’s no way to be sure, of course, as there are no confirmed pieces of John the Baptist to compare to the fragments of bone. But the sarcophagus holding the bones was found near a second box bearing the name of St. John and his feast date (also called a holy day) of June 24. Now, new radiocarbon dating of the collagen in one of the bones pegs its age to the early first century, consistent with the New Testament and Jewish histories of John the Baptist’s life.

“We got some dates that are very interesting indeed,” study researcher Thomas Higham of the University of Oxford told LiveScience. “They suggest that the human bone is all from the same person, it’s from a male, and it has a very high likelihood of an origin in the Near East,” or Middle East where John the Baptist would have lived.

‘No way to be sure of course’…  Well good grief if you recognize that why would you even hint that they ‘may’ be?  After more explanations of the ‘discovery’ of the relic box which contained the bones we get to the real reason the story is coming out now…

None of this proves that the bones belonged to a historical figure named John the Baptist, but researchers haven’t been able to rule out the possibility, Higham said. Their study has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal, but a program detailing the research will be aired on the United Kingdom National Geographic Channel on Sunday. National Geographic funded the research.

Their study hasn’t been published but that won’t stop NatGeo from airing a special on it.   Ah, the glories of relic-pimping for the sake of corporate profit.  If you want to know what drives so much ‘archaeology’ today just look at the money trail.


2 thoughts on “No, They Have Not Found John the Baptist’s Bones

  1. Charles K. 15 Jun 2012 at 4:57 am

    I do not see the problem. The bones are in Damascus and they are also in Rome. If John had two bodies, I do not see why three bodies would be impossible. 😉


  2. Bones of John the Baptist? 16 Jun 2012 at 10:55 pm

    […] to make the case, is offered by Christopher Rollston. Mark Goodacre, John Byron, Michael Heiser, Jim West, and Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog have also mentioned the topic.A documentary on the topic is […]


Comments are closed.