# data[].attributes.body
In Christianity, a Eucharistic miracle is any miracle involving the Eucharist. The Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Eastern Orthodox, Methodist, Anglican and Oriental Orthodox Churches believe that Christ is really made manifest in the Eucharist and deem this a Eucharistic miracle; however, this is to be distinguished from other manifestations of God. The Catholic Church distinguishes between divine revelation, such as the Eucharist, and private revelation, such as Eucharistic miracles. In general, reported Eucharistic miracles usually consist of unexplainable phenomena such as consecrated Hosts visibly transforming into myocardium tissue, being preserved for extremely long stretches of time, surviving being thrown into fire, bleeding, or even sustaining people for decades.

Verification of Eucharistic miracles often depends on the religious branch reporting the supposed miracle, but in the case of the Catholic Church, a special task-force or commission investigates supposed Eucharistic miracles before deciding whether they are "worthy of belief." As with other private revelations, such as Marian apparitions, belief in approved miracles is not mandated by the Catholic Church, but often serves to reassure believers of God's presence or as the means to "send a message" to the population at large. Anglican Churches have also reported extraordinary Eucharistic miracles.

# data[].attributes.body
Q: Why did God need to send his son for our sins? Isn't he God? Couldn't he have done it himself?

A; Love. Mercy. Justice. Truth.

The first Love God demonstrated was “Creation”—that is, creating the world, human beings, and just everything within the world; and as well, the entire story of all God had created—from its beginning to its end. The “beginning to the end” of God's Creation Story has Jesus as the “Central Character” of it—or “Hero, Protagonist,” if you will; or Jesus is the “Story of God’s Creation”.

Jesus is “God joined or partaking in His own Creation”, which is why Jesus is “the Son of God” because “God begot or created Him”. Jesus is the “Firstborn of all creations” and the “Image of God” because He is “the exact Likeness and Form of God”. God (indirectly) created the world (i.e., us) “through Jesus”, and so Jesus “directly created us or the world”—therefore “Jesus is our God and Father”; while the “Most High God and Father” who created Jesus is “Jesus' Father”…but still “our Father” because “He's the True or Greater Father” who created us all.

After man fell “from (the original perfection of) God” through sin (hand of Satan), man “died of God” or man “spiritually died” and therefore was now “subject to Satan”. So the situation became that we live for awhile in this difficult world, sin more, commit more wickedness, eat, work, and finally die…and die “in spirit” as well because we had committed so much evil we could not atone for.

God is Just. Absolutely Just, because “justice is a truth” and “God is Truth” or the sum of all infinite truths…actually all truths are “one”—so “Truth (Jesus)”; but God (Most High) is greater than Jesus, the Truth, because He (i.e., God) created the Truth. Jesus is Justice, and God is also Justice but greater. This means “God MUST reward and punish accordingly to the value of what action”. So by this, God is perfectly “justified” to condemn all of us to hell (eternal death) because we have all sinned (against His Holiness).

Now, God is Mercy. Or God is absolutely Merciful. He can forgive unforgivable acts—”unforgivable” because it “absolutely insults the absolute Purity and Holiness of God to be able to be ordinarily forgiven”; any sin, no matter how big or small is unforgivable before God, yet God can at the same time forgive such sin, because He is Merciful. This Nature of God, which springs out of His Nature of absolute Love bodes well for us, for out of that was born salvation for us.

God made His Creation “at once” and so knew all what will happen “from beginning to end”. He saw how man will fall and so made plans for that that unfortunate event. Know that “God always demonstrates all His Nature of truths at once” in all His actions. God after doing something “at once” then makes it happen “in stages or processes” to of course perfectly match what He made and saw at once.

In order to be able to forgive man for his unforgivable sins against His Holy Nature and Purity, God had to come down on earth Himself “in the Form of His Son—Jesus” to suffer what we suffer, and die as we die,… but also finally go to hell to suffer for the sake of those whom would believe Him and obey Him or live like Him. The “sin of man” was “in doing what God never does or is against Him: evil—which is contrary to truth”.

So by coming down to earth from His Kingdom “through His Son”, He as well demonstrated “how we must live on earth: life of ‘truly’ loving one another”—by living a perfect life of love. That means, He was perfect on earth and “deserved not to suffer or die”, yet “He suffered and died”—why? Because He did this to “exchange for our place”: we sin and therefore die. So Satan foolishly incited “his people—the world” to kill Him without knowing what he was really doing—but of course, how could he know when “it was truth” and “he himself had no truth in him”.

It is like this: man sins and dies, and therefore “under the complete power of Satan”—who is the father of lies, and the God of death and darkness. Jesus, the Son of God, came to live perfectly and therefore was “completely free from the power of Satan”, yet Satan unjustly killed Him, and so had to pay for by “releasing and setting free from his power all who would believe in Jesus and live like He did: love”.

Please note that “Jesus didn't die for ALL, as many wrongly believe”, but died ONLY for “all who would believe in Him”. Believing in Jesus means “obeying Him” by “forsaking yourself and the world and following in His earthly steps”.

Jesus left all He had: His Eternal Kingdom, except His Love—which is Himself to come to this pathetic earth to suffer and die for us; what is really too worthwhile on this earth that we can't easily forsake for Jesus. We must then, sell all we have and give them to the poor if we want to “receive the Kingdom of God”.

But just be sure that whomever refuses to believe in Jesus and live like He did, will never see Eternal Life—they will be thrown into the eternal lake of fire to suffer forever for rejecting something as precious as eternal life in Jesus. Rejecting Jesus is “making all His effort (of forsaking His Kingdom, coming down to suffer, to die and pass through hell itself) in vain” by refusing to believe in Him “just” for this petty life of nothing.

What do we gain if we achieve the whole world but lose our soul? Everything we ever work for in this world is really worthless. We will die and leave all behind us, so why can't we show a little love for one another by sharing amongst ourselves what we have or even giving away what we have to the poor?

# data[].attributes.body
Jesus, In Christianity, the son of God and the second person of the Holy Trinity. Christian doctrine holds that by his crucifixion and resurrection he paid for the sins of all mankind. His life and ministry are recounted in the four Gospels of the New Testament.

# data[].attributes.headline
Main Evidence for Jesus Christ of the New Testament.

# data[].attributes.subject
Main Evidence for Jesus Christ of the New Testament.

# data[].attributes.body
Our evidence for the historical figure 'Jesus Christ' could roughly be divided into non-Christian and Christian sources.

First let’s talk about the absence of evidence:

There is not a lot of physical/archeological evidence tied to Jesus, nor do we have any written evidence directly linked to him.

But strictly speaking, we have no archaeological evidence for any upper-class Jew from the 20s CE either. Nor do we have more evidence for Pontius Pilate, who is a Roman aristocrat in charge of a major province, than we do for Jesus.

Okay, on to non-Christian references.

Pliny the Younger, writing in 112 AD, letter 10, discusses the issue of Christians gathering together, illegally. He knows a few facts about early Christian practice, and so by the early second century we know that Christians exist and believe in a Christ figure.

Suetonius,115 AD, in his Lives of the Caesars, discussing Claudius (41-54), mentions the deportations of Jews after riots “on the instigation for Chrestus”. There is a possibility that he means a Jew named Chrestus, a not uncommon name, but more likely this is a common misspelling for Christus. At best, Suetonius supports that Christians were living in Rome in the 50s AD.

Tacitus, in his Annales (15.44) written in 115, covers history from 14-68AD. He treats the fire in Rome under Nero in 64AD, and discusses Nero’s blaming of the Christians. He mentions “The author of this name, Christ, was put to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate, while Tiberius was emperor; but the dangerous superstition, though suppressed for the moment, broke out again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but even in the city”

So Tacitus claims that there were Christians in Rome in the 60s, that the sect originates in Judea, that they are named for a figure/founder ‘Christ’, and that Pontius Pilate executed him.

There are claims by mythicists that this passage in Tacitus is an interpolation, but there is no evidence for this and almost no serious classicist supports it.

Tacitus’ information is clearly second-hand, and he is incorrect in that Pilate was prefect, not procurator. At the same time, in those circumstances prefect and procurator were virtually equivalent at the time.

Jewish sources

**Josephus** He’s a Jewish aristocrat and military leader. Lost in battle during the 66 uprising and ultimately surrendered to the Romans. He was later used as an interpreter during the siege of Jerusalem, then taken to Rome and where he became a writer of history.

He makes 2 references to Jesus. 1 in Antiquities book 20, referring to the death of James, the brother of Jesus (Antiquities 20.9.1). The other passage is known as the Testimonium Flavianum, in Antiquities 18.3.3 This passage refers to Jesus as a miracle worker, a leader of Jews and Greeks, the Messiah, condemned by Pilate to the Cross, appearing alive on the third day, and his followers continue until the present.

The major problem with this passage is that Josephus is a Jew, and shows no evidence of being a Christian, and so this depiction is inconsistent with Josephus. There are three possibilities – that the text is entirely made-up (the Mythicist position), that the text is entirely genuine (the hyper-conservative Christian position), that the text is original but altered (the position taken by most scholars). For my part, a less sensational version of the text with obviously Christian elements removed is more likely to be original.

Christian sources

We still need to treat these as historical documents, they are not more or less reliable because they are Christian.

So we have Mark, written around 70AD, then we have Matthew and Luke, based in large degree upon Mark, written probably in the 80-85 period. And yet Matthew and Luke share common material not found in Mark, which is typically referred to as Q (from quelle, German for ‘source’), besides material distinct to Matthew (M) and Luke (L), so you have in fact 4 likely documentary sources. Plus you have John written in the 90s AD, an independent source from the other canonical gospels.

There are also non-canonical gospels written after John, some of which show independence from the canonical gospels. For example Thomas, dated to 110-120AD. Thomas is primarily a collection of sayings, it is not a narrative text. Similarly the fragmentary Gospel of Peter. Bart Ehrman also likes to highlight Papyrus Egerton 2 or “The Unknown Gospel” as a non-parallel independent account. Read it here: https://www.gospels.net/egerton

There are many other gospels but most are significantly later, and show development of miraculous and legendary accounts, often disconnected to the earlier documents.

Update: 10/25/2024 Phlegon of Tralles. Phlegon, born about A.D. 80, was a secular historian who lived in the second century. There are two books credited to his name:Chronicles and the Olympiads. Little is known about Phlegon, but he made reference to Christ.

“And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place . . .”  – Origen, Against Celsus, Book 2.33

“Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ, and no other (eclipse); it is clear that he did not know from his sources about any (similar) eclipse in previous times . . . and this is shown by the historical account of Tiberius Caesar.” – Philopon, De. opif. mund. II 21

“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Cæsar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth – manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? . . . And calculation makes out that the period of 70 weeks, as noted in Daniel, is completed at this time.” – Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1

These statements reveal several key things:

1. Christ was crucified.

2. Julius Africanus states that Christ died at the end of Daniel’s 70 week prophecy.

3. The sun was darkened during Christ’s death from 12:00 pm to 3:00 pm.

4. A solar eclipse supposedly occurred during a full moon. However, this is scientifically impossible.

5. A great earthquake occurred during Christ’s death.

6. The facts were recorded in a historical account of Tiberius.

Furthermore, while no doubt that there is oral tradition behind these texts, there are almost certainly written sources. For example the Q material in Matthew and Luke is frequently identical, enough that you would suspect it was a written document, not merely oral material. Matthew and Luke almost certainly used other documentary sources, whether one or several, we simply don’t know.

Then you should factor in how you account for other early Christian literature, including the other NT documents, and documents written shortly after, for example Papias, quoted later in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, claims to have directly inquired about the apostles’ teaching, and so is about a 3rd generation source.

So, to conclude, there is a considerable amount of documentary evidence to support the supposition that Jesus existed as a historical human being. This write-up is drawn from my notes on introduction to historical Jesus studies. I’m happy to go on to discuss individual issues, primary documents, or provide a further bibliography for secondary reading.

# data[].attributes.body
The Shroud of Turin (Italian: Sindone di Torino), also known as the Holy Shroud (Italian: Sacra Sindone), is a length of linen cloth that bears a faint image of the front and back of a man. It has been venerated for centuries, especially by members of the Catholic Church, as the actual burial shroud used to wrap the body of Jesus of Nazareth after his crucifixion, and upon which Jesus's bodily image is miraculously imprinted. The human image on the shroud can be discerned more clearly in a black and white photographic negative than in its natural sepia color, an effect discovered in 1898 by Secondo Pia, who produced the first photographs of the shroud. This negative image is associated with a popular Catholic devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus. The shroud's authenticity as a holy relic has been disputed even within the Catholic Church, and radiocarbon dating has shown it to be a medieval artifact.

The documented history of the shroud dates back to 1354, when it was exhibited in the new collegiate church of Lirey, a village in north-central France. The shroud was denounced as a forgery by the bishop of Troyes in 1389. It was acquired by the House of Savoy in 1453 and later deposited in a chapel in Chambéry, where it was damaged by fire in 1532. In 1578, the Savoys moved the shroud to their new capital in Turin, where it has remained ever since. Since 1683, it has been kept in the Chapel of the Holy Shroud, which was designed for that purpose by architect Guarino Guarini and which is connected to both the royal palace and the Turin Cathedral.  Ownership of the shroud passed from the House of Savoy to the Catholic Church after the death of former king Umberto II in 1983.

The microscopist Walter McCrone found, based on his examination of samples taken in 1978 from the surface of the shroud using adhesive tape, that the image on the shroud had been painted with a dilute solution of red ochre pigment in a gelatin medium. McCrone found that the apparent bloodstains were painted with vermilion pigment, also in a gelatin medium. McCrone's findings were disputed by other researchers and the nature of the image on the shroud continues to be debated.

In 1988, radiocarbon dating by three different laboratories established that the shroud's linen material was produced between the years 1260 and 1390 (to a 95% confidence level). Defenders of the authenticity of the shroud have questioned those results, usually on the basis that the samples tested might have been contaminated or taken from a repair to the original fabric. Such fringe theories have been refuted by carbon-dating experts and others based on evidence from the shroud itself, including the medieval repair theory, the bio-contamination theories and the carbon monoxide theory. Though accepted as valid by experts, the carbon-dating of the shroud continues to generate significant public debate.  The nature and history of the shroud have been the subjects of extensive and long-lasting controversies in both the scholarly literature and the popular press. Currently, the Catholic Church neither endorses nor rejects the authenticity of the shroud as a relic of Jesus. In 2013 Pope Francis referred to it as an "icon of a man scourged and crucified".

Update: as of 10/25/2024, we have even more proof that the Shroud Of Turin was real. The new study, using X-rays to inspect linen threads from the shroud, traces its origin all the way back to the time of Jesus. Though the study, published in the journal Heritage, falls short of concluding whether the shroud was actually Jesus's burial cloth, it dates its origin to 2,000 years ago.

# data[].attributes.headline
ᴡʜᴀᴛ ᴅɪᴅ ᴊᴇꜱᴜꜱ ʟᴏᴏᴋ ʟɪᴋᴇ? (A Contemporary Description)

# data[].attributes.subject
ᴡʜᴀᴛ ᴅɪᴅ ᴊᴇꜱᴜꜱ ʟᴏᴏᴋ ʟɪᴋᴇ? (A Contemporary Description)

# data[].attributes.body
What Did Jesus Look Like? (A Contemporary Description)

For centuries, the most common image of Jesus Christ, at least in Western cultures, has been that of a bearded, Caucasian skinned man with long, wavy, light brown or blond hair and (often) blue eyes. Others say that Jesus might have looked more like the people of his time. His skin might have been more dark, shorter hair, maybe (no/not) (a) beard with brown eyes. So basically, a normal 1st century Palestinian.

# data[].attributes.body
According to the New Testament, Jesus gave his disciples wine - a symbol of his blood that would be shed and gave them bread (probably matzah) - a symbol of his body that would be sacrificed for his believers. In one of the corners of the hall, under a small dome erected above a flight of stairs, stands a column with a decoration depicting a pair of pelican chicks prying their mother's heart. The female pelican, ready to sacrifice herself for her chicks, symbolizes in the Christian art of the Middle Ages the sacrifice of Christ for humanity.

According to Christian tradition, other significant events took place in this place: On the Pentecost after the crucifixion, the disciples of Jesus and his mother, Mary, gathered here. The Holy Spirit filled them, and they began to speak in different languages unknown to them until now, and with their help, they set out to spread Christianity among the nations. The day the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles is celebrated on the holiday of Pentecost (the day of Pentecost, from Pesach to Shavuot), the Christian holiday of Shavuot.

The hall included here was built by the Crusaders about 800 years ago and was part of a large church built by the Crusaders over the remains of an early Byzantine church. The building got its current form after being renovated in 1335 by the Franciscan monks, the guardians of the Holy Land.

On the floor below is the tomb of King David. According to the New Testament, Jesus is considered a descendant of the House of David. Due to King David's importance to Islam and Judaism, many conflicts arose around the entire complex, and it changed hands over the generations. We can sense the vicissitudes of history by looking towards the southern wall of the hall, where a Muslim prayer alcove - "Mihrab" - was placed, indicating the direction of prayer to Mecca. This is a late addition, probably from the 16th century when the Muslims expelled Franciscan monks from the Mount Zion compound, and the hall became part of a mosque.

The decorations beautifully illustrate the combination of cultures at this site: the pointed window sills are built in a Gothic-Christian style. In contrast, the window panes are decorated in a Muslim style. The beautiful pointed arches adorn the ceiling in Crusader-Gothic style, and inscriptions in stylized Arabic script adorn the wall.

Since 1948, the State of Israel has taken possession of the holy places on Mount Zion - including this hall. The mass held here by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI illustrates the holiness that Christianity attributes to this site.

# data[].attributes.body
The Pilate stone is a damaged block (82 cm x 65 cm) of carved limestone with a partially intact inscription attributed to, and mentioning, Pontius Pilate, a prefect of the Roman province of Judea from AD 26 to 36. It was discovered at the archaeological site of Caesarea Maritima in 1961. The artifact is particularly significant because it is an archaeological find of an authentic 1st-century Roman inscription mentioning the name "[Pont]ius Pilatus". It is contemporary to Pilate's lifetime, and accords with what is known of his reported career. In effect, the inscription constitutes the earliest surviving, and only contemporary, record of Pilate, who is otherwise known from the New Testament and apocryphal texts, the Jewish historian Josephus and writer Philo, and brief references by Roman historians such as Tacitus.

It is likely that Pontius Pilate made his base at Caesarea Maritima – the site where the stone was discovered, since that city had replaced Jerusalem as the administrative capital and military headquarters of the province in AD 6. Pilate probably travelled to Jerusalem, the central city of the province's Jewish population, only when necessary.

The Pilate stone is currently held at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. Plaster-cast replicas can be found at the Archaeological Museum in Milan, Italy, and on display in Caesarea Maritima itself.

On the partially damaged block is a dedication to the deified Augustus and Livia (the Augustan gods or "Divine Augusti"), the stepfather and mother of emperor Tiberius, originally placed within a Tiberieum, probably a temple dedicated to Tiberius. It has been deemed authentic because it was discovered in the coastal town of Caesarea, which was the capital of Iudaea Province during the time Pontius Pilate was Roman governor.

The partial inscription reads (conjectural letters in brackets):

[DIS AUGUSTI]S TIBERIÉUM

[...PONTI]US PILATUS

[...PRAEF]ECTUS IUDA[EA]E

[...FECIT D]E[DICAVIT]

The translation from Latin to English for the inscription reads:

To the Divine Augusti [this] Tiberieum

...Pontius Pilate

...prefect of Judea

...has dedicated [this]

The limestone block was discovered in June 1961 by Italian archaeologist Maria Teresa Fortuna Canivet during a campaign led by Dr. Antonio Frova while excavating in the area of an ancient theatre built by decree of Herod the Great around 22–10 BC, along with the entire city of Caesarea.

The artifact is a fragment of the dedicatory inscription of a later building, probably a temple, that was constructed, possibly in honour of the emperor Tiberius, dating to AD 26 to 36.

The stone was then reused in the 4th century as a building block for a set of stairs belonging to a structure erected behind the stage house of the Herodian theatre, and it was discovered there, still attached to the ancient staircase, by the archaeologists.

# data[].attributes.body
A relic described as the Holy Lance in Rome is preserved beneath the dome of Saint Peter's Basilica, although the Catholic Church makes no claim as to its authenticity. The first historical reference to a lance was made in AD 570 by an unknown pilgrim from Piacenza (often erroneously identified with St. Antoninus of Piacenza) in his descriptions of the holy places of Jerusalem, writing that he saw in the Basilica of Mount Zion "the crown of thorns with which Our Lord was crowned and the lance with which He was struck in the side", although there is uncertainty about the exact site to which he refers, A lance is mentioned in the so-called Breviarius at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The alleged presence in Jerusalem of the relic is attested by Cassiodorus (c. 485–585) as well as by Gregory of Tours (c. 538–594), who had not actually been to Jerusalem. The name of the soldier who pierced Christ's side with a lonchē is not given in the Gospel of John, but in the oldest known references to the legend, the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus appended to late manuscripts of the 4th century Acts of Pilate, the soldier is identified as a centurion and called Longinus (making the spear's Latin name Lancea Longini).

# data[].attributes.body
The Siloam Pool has long been considered a sacred Christian site, even if the correct identification of the site itself was uncertain. According to the Gospel of John, it was at the Siloam Pool where Jesus healed the blind man (John 9:1–11).

Traditionally, the Christian site of the Siloam Pool was the pool and church that were built by the Byzantine empress Eudocia (c. 400–460 A.D.) to commemorate the miracle recounted in the New Testament. However, the exact location of the original pool as it existed during the time of Jesus remained a mystery until June 2004.

During construction work to repair a large water pipe south of Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, at the southern end of the ridge known as the City of David, archaeologists Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron identified two ancient stone steps. Further excavation revealed that they were part of a monumental pool from the Second Temple period, the period in which Jesus lived. The structure Reich and Shukron discovered was 225 feet long, with corners that are slightly greater than 90 degrees, indicating a trapezoidal shape, with the widening end oriented toward Tyropoeon valley.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The ruins of the Byzantine Church, adjacent to the site of the Pool of Bethesda.

# data[].attributes.body
The Pool of Bethesda is from the Christian Bible's New Testament, John 5:2 account of Jesus healing a paralyzed man at a pool in Jerusalem, described as being near the Sheep Gate and surrounded by five covered colonnades or porticoes. It is now associated with the site of a pool in the current Muslim Quarter of the city, near the gate now called the Lions' Gate or St. Stephen's Gate and the Church of St. Anne, that was excavated in the late 19th century. In archaeological digs conducted in the 19th century, Conrad Schick discovered a large tank situated about 100 feet (30 m) north-west of St. Anne's Church, which he contended was the Pool of Bethesda. Further archaeological excavation in the area, in 1964, uncovered the remains of the Byzantine and Crusader churches, Hadrian's Temple of Asclepius and Serapis, the small healing pools of an Asclepeion, the second of the two large pools, and the dam between them. It was discovered that the Byzantine church had been built in the very heart of Hadrian's temple and contained the healing pools.

# data[].attributes.body
The Chapel of the Ascension (Hebrew: קפלת העלייה Qapelat ha-ʿAliyya; Greek: Εκκλησάκι της Αναλήψεως, Ekklisáki tis Analípseos; Arabic: كنيسة الصعود) is a chapel and shrine located on the Mount of Olives, in the At-Tur district of Jerusalem. Part of a larger complex consisting first of a Christian church and monastery, then an Islamic mosque (Zawiyat al-Adawiya), it is located on a site traditionally believed to be the earthly spot where Jesus ascended into Heaven after his Resurrection. It houses a slab of stone believed to contain one of his footprints.

# data[].attributes.body
Many might think that the holy cradle of the Child Jesus is in Bethlehem, but it is in the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome.

In this basilica is kept a relic that has been the object of devotion for several centuries. It is the remains of the "sacred cradle" or manger in which, according to the Gospels, the Child Jesus was placed at birth.

In 432 Pope Sixtus III decided to build inside the primitive Basilica of St. Mary Major a "grotto of the Nativity" similar to the one in Bethlehem. The church then took the name of Santa Maria 'adpraesepem', which in Latin means "manger".

All this was the object of a popular devotion that motivated many of the faithful, returning from pilgrimages to the Holy Land, to bring as gifts what were considered the wooden fragments of the famous manger of the Child Jesus, and which are currently preserved in a reliquary with the name of the sacred cradle (cunabulum).

In Santa Maria Maggiore is also preserved another relic related to the crib: the panniculum, which is a small piece of cloth the size of a hand and which is kept in a case donated by Pius IX. According to tradition, it is a strip of the cloth with which Mary wrapped the baby Jesus.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the place where

Jesus actually prayed upon while Peter, James and John were sleeping against the olive trees. After a few steps through the garden, it was hard to miss the quick transition back to reality. Would it surprise you if we told you they built an actual church around the rock where Jesus fell on his face and cried out to his Father, "Not as I will, but as you will!"

The church is pretty epic. Elaborate murals consume the walls and ceiling while flags represent each nation. The Basilica of the Agony is the original name of the church. It was built from 1919-1924 with funding from twelve different countries, thus giving it the nickname, The Church of All Nations.

In the center, the high altar overlooks a large slab of rock, which is said to be the rock on which Jesus prayed in agony the night of his betrayal.

Apparently they also do church services as well.

When you're standing at the Garden of Gethsemane, this is the glimpse you get of the Old City in Jerusalem (where the Via Dolorosa is, etc.). The particular part of the Old City Walls is the Golden Gate, a closed gate located above ground level and below the Temple Mount. It is only visible from outside the city.

According to Jewish tradition, when the Messiah comes, he will enter Jerusalem through this gate. To prevent him from coming, the Muslims sealed the gate during the rule of Suleiman.

As Christians, all we can say is, "Praise God that the Messiah has already come and defeated the grave! Now we wait eagerly for his glorious return."

# data[].attributes.body
The discovery was made by a German nun, Sister Blandina Paschalis Schlӧmer, not by an expert scientist. Her curiosity was captured by the photo in a newspaper, Das Zeichen Mariens, dated 1978. It was the Christ image on a veil housed in a small Capuchin shrine in Manoppello, a nice but unknown Italian town on Mount Maiella, far from Rome, about two hours by car.

The photo immediately reminded her of something, but she didn’t realize what. After some time, it was clear: There was a resemblance to the face of Christ on the Shroud of Turin. After some investigation, she found that if you put one over the other, the Manoppello image and the face impressed on the Shroud of Turin, all the anatomic details and the traces of the wounds, matched perfectly.

History tells that in Middle-Age Rome, the most popular attraction for pilgrims was “the Veronica,” namely a veil so-called because, according to tradition, it was used by St. Veronica to wipe the face of Christ on Calvary.

# data[].attributes.body
The Sudarium of Oviedo, or Shroud of Oviedo, is a bloodstained piece of cloth measuring c. 84 x 53 cm (33 x 21 inches) kept in the Cámara Santa of the Cathedral of San Salvador, Oviedo, Spain. The Sudarium (Latin for sweat cloth) is thought to be the cloth that was wrapped around the head of Jesus Christ after he died as described in John 20:6–7.

# data[].attributes.body
This is said to be the pillar where they hit/scourged/ Jesus. There is no evidence that the pillar is the one at which Jesus was beaten and scourged in Pilate’s praetorium; nevertheless, it is very likely. The first mention comes from the journal of Egeria, a pilgrim who visited the Holy Land in the late fourth century, who observed, “Many devotees went to Zion to pray before the pillar at which Jesus was scourged.”

# data[].attributes.body
The Holy Prepuce , or Holy Foreskin (Latin præputium or prepucium), is one of several relics attributed to Jesus, a product of the circumcision of Jesus. At various points in history, a number of churches in Europe have claimed to possess Jesus's foreskin, sometimes at the same time. Various miraculous powers have been ascribed to it. And after being lost for almost 1500 years, Christ's foreskin (known as the Holy Prepuce) was discovered in the small Roman town of Calcata, disproving a theory by 17th century theologian Leo Allatius that it ascended into heaven to become the rings of Saturn. (Sorry about the low quality image, it was really hard to find a good picture.)

# data[].attributes.body
Q; Has Jesus ever claimed to be God?

The New Testament is replete with direct and indirect claims of Christ’s divinity. Perhaps the most famous is the beginning of the Gospel of John: “In the beginning was the word and the word of with God and the word was God” (John 1:1-3). Jesus is the word made flesh (John 1:14). Jesus is God.

Nevertheless, people have struggled to find places where Jesus himself claims to be divine. If you’re looking for a passage in Scripture where Jesus says, “Hey, everyone, I’m God!” you’re not going to find it.

Jesus does make such a claim several times, but it isn’t easy for us to see today, because we are not familiar with the first-century Jewish context he draws upon, and since these claims are somewhat veiled to our eyes, people can reinterpret Jesus’ words to explain away his divine self-reference. While such words can be explained away, Jesus’ audience’s reaction to his words isn’t so easy to dismiss.

Unless your view of the ancient world comes from Monty Python, people didn’t carry stones in their pockets, just itching to stone someone. The charge of blasphemy was serious, and stoning was against Roman law. Therefore, the reaction of Jesus’ original hearers provides a solid indicator as to whether he claimed to be divine.

One example concerns the reaction of the Jewish high priest to Jesus’ response during his trial before the Sanhedrin. The text reads,

The high priest rose before the assembly and questioned Jesus, saying, “Have you no answer? What are these men testifying against you?” But he [Jesus] was silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him and said to him, “Are you the Messiah, the son of the Blessed One?” Then Jesus answered, “I am; and ‘you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.’” At that the high priest tore his garments and said, “What further need have we of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They all condemned him as deserving to die (Mark 14:60-64; see also Matt. 26:61-66).

At first glance, it appears that the high priest is overreacting. Where did Jesus blaspheme? Some suggest that Jesus claimed the divine name for himself when he replied, “I am” (see Exod. 3:14). Saying the divine name aloud in the first century would have been a serious offense, but we know this is not the case from the parallel passage in Matthew, where “I am” is given as “you have said so” (Matt. 26:64).

Another possibility is that Jesus’ affirmation to being the Messiah was itself blasphemous. This option is even less likely, since most Jews believed that the Messiah would be a mere mortal. Claiming to be the Messiah, therefore, would not constitute a claim to be God.

Why, then, did the high priest tear his robes in horror at Jesus’ words? Clearly, Jesus claimed something about himself that those present thought warranted immediate execution. But what? The answer may be found in Jesus’ use of the seventh chapter in the book of Daniel, where the prophet receives a night vision and recalls:

As I looked, thrones were placed and one that was ancient of days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued and came forth from before him; a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the court sat in judgment, and the books were opened (7:9-10).

Note that more than one throne was set up. One was for the “ancient of days”—namely, God—to sit upon, but what about the other? Keep this in mind as we continue with verse 13:

I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed (vv. 13-14).

In this passage, “one like a son of man” comes “with the clouds of heaven” and presents himself before God (the Ancient of Days) and receives universal and everlasting dominion over the whole earth.

These two passages together cause a certain amount of exegetical tension. If God is one, why set up more than one throne? Who sits on the other throne? Indeed, how can any creature be worthy to be enthroned next to God?

The Babylonian Talmud illustrates this tension by recording a dispute between two rabbis who lived in the first decades of the second century:

One verse of Scripture states, “His throne was fiery flames” (Dan. 7:9), but elsewhere it is written, “Till thrones were places, and one that was ancient of days did sit” (Dan. 7:9)! . . . “One is for him, the other for David,” the words of R. Aqiba. Said to him R. Yosé the Galilean, “Aqiba, how long are you going to treat in a profane way the Presence of God? Rather, one is for bestowing judgment, the other for bestowing righteousness” (Hagigah 2:1a-e).

Rabbi Aqiba understood this passage to refer to two thrones: one throne for God and the other for the Messiah, the son of David. Notice Rabbi Yosé the Galilean’s response to Aqiba’s interpretation: “How long are you going to treat in a profane way the Presence of God?” However great the Messiah would be, according to Rabbi Yosé’s perspective, being seated on a throne would be a profanation of the Divine Presence. Instead, he suggested, the two thrones should be understood as symbols for God’s judgment and the bestowing of righteousness.

Later in the passage, Aqiba eventually adopts this view. Others proposed that one throne was for God to be seated and the other was his footstool (Isa. 66:1). In any case, the two thrones were for God alone. Another individual, even the Messiah, could not take the other throne without detracting from the glory of the one true God, since to be enthroned was to possess the authority to exercise dominion. It’s interesting that later rabbis did interpret Daniel 7 to be messianic, but they omit any mention of the thrones.

The prophet Daniel never tells us who sits on the other throne, but he does tell us that the “one like the son of man” presents himself before God (the Ancient of Days) and receives an everlasting and universal dominion. Does this mean that the “Son of Man” is seated on the other throne? Daniel doesn’t say, but Jesus’ reply to the high priest does affirm this question: “I am; and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

The “Son of Man” does sit on the throne at the right hand of the Power (God) and comes with the clouds of heaven—and Jesus is that Son of Man, who receives universal and everlasting dominion! No wonder the high priest tore his robes in horror. Jesus made himself equal to God.

To us who may not be familiar with the prophecies of Daniel, Jesus’ words seem to pertain only to his Second Coming, without any reference to his divinity. The high priest’s reaction forces us to look deeper into the passage to find some warrant for his actions. In this case, the high priest is a hostile witness to the proper meaning of this passage.

For further explanation: https://www.christianity.com/jesus/is-jesus-god/what-jesus-said-about-himself/did-jesus-claim-to-be-god.html

More links;

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/did-jesus-claim-to-be-god

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/when-jesus-said-he-was-god

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/but-jesus-never-said-he-was-god

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you’re looking for a Scripture passage where Jesus says, “Hey, everyone, I’m God!” you’re not going to find it. But you will find something else . . .

# data[].attributes.body
The Holy Chalice vessel, or Santo Cáliz, is an agate cup preserved in the Cathedral of Valencia. It is the object most commonly credited as being the actual Holy Grail used by Jesus during the Last Supper. It is located in the Cathedral of Valencia. It is located in Valencia, Spain. It's coordinates are: 39°28′33″N 0°22′30″W

# data[].attributes.body
This is the Church of the Nativity, or the Basilica of the Nativity, said to be the place where Christian savior, Jesus Christ was born. It is located in  Bethlehem in the State of Palestine, in the West Bank. Here is a video of the inside of this church. Channel: 'The Holy Land, by Zahi Shaked'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The exact place where Jesus was born. The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. Merry Christmas

# data[].attributes.body
John The Baptist, the preacher in the Bible that baptized Jesus Christ. This is his head, located in the Amiens Cathedral in France. It's also said that they have found his arm, that arm that baptized Jesus. And some other fragments of him. Now why did I put this here? You might ask. Because I don't want to create an entirely new section dedicated to John The Baptist.

# data[].attributes.body
Q: How can Jesus be God, and the Son of God at the same time?

A: So the Bible tells us that Jesus isn’t ‘God’s human son’, rather, that Jesus, who is co-eternal with God (that means that like God, he existed forever) became human. Jesus was like God - eternal and perfect - but he became human so that he could enter into our world and die for humans. The Bible treats this as something to marvel at: ... Jesus Christ ‘though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.’ (Philippians 2:6-8) The actual ‘mechanics’ of how God had a human son are not explained to us, but we are left in no doubt that Mary’s conception and pregnancy are miraculous - you could read chapter 1 of the gospel of Luke to see the angel tell Mary that she will fall pregnant. The gospel of John, which is written in very symbolic language at the beginning, speaks about ‘the word becoming flesh’. ‘The word’ is Jesus - who was with God in the beginning - and he became flesh - this is what ‘incarnate’ means - to be made flesh. This makes it clear that Jesus is the eternal God becoming human. So in answer to your second question, it isn’t so much that God had a human son, but that God’s son became human for our sake.

So, to look at the first part of your question, what does it mean for God to have a son? Well, actually, when we say ‘God’ we could almost mean three people - God the Father, God the Son, or God the Holy Spirit. These three are called ‘the trinity’ and each one is called a ‘person’ of the trinity. It is quite hard to understand how these three work together. Some people find it easier to understand with an analogy - so, for example, God is like water - ice, water and steam are all water but they are all different. The analogy fails at various points but that might be a way to start to get your head around it. So a few things about the trinity that we should keep in mind:

* There is only one God - so even as we talk about the three persons of the trinity we are talking about one God. All three persons of the trinity are God. If you want to look at some verses, you could look at Deuteronomy 6:4, Galatians 1:1, John 1:1-18, and Matthew 28:19.

* There is relationship in the trinity - the Son (Jesus) is obedient to the Father (Luke 22:42); the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son (John 16:15ff).

So the three persons of the trinity are the same God, but they are each distinct. They have different roles, but each action any member of the trinity might do is God’s action, regardless of who did it.

* We see this distinction / unity when Jesus identifies himself with the Father, saying that he and the Father ‘are one’ (John 10:38, 17:11,21), and that he is in the Father and vice versa (John 14:11). Jesus does not say that he IS the Father, or that he and the Father are the SAME, but that they are ONE. So they are distinct, yet unified.
* Because Jesus and the Father are both one and distinct, we can say that God ‘sent his son into the world’ - (John 3:16), and also that Jesus came into the world (1 Tim 1:15) - we are speaking about essentially the same action on the part of God, but on the one hand, God the Father sends, on the other, God the Son comes.
*We also see the distinction / unity at work when Jesus speaks about sending the Holy Spirit in John 16 - he describes this as both he and the Father coming. So the three persons of the trinity are distinct, but they are all God - they all share the same motivations and objectives. They are all co-eternal, they are all perfect.

God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - one God, existing in perfect relationship within himself. This is how God can be both Father and Son - because he just is! It’s a bit unsatisfying - to not wrap our heads around it more - but if we want to have a right idea of who God is and what he is like, it’s necessary to hold these strands together.

I hope this goes some way to answering your question. A really helpful thing to do would be to read John 14-16, where Jesus explains some of this himself. In fact, why not read John from the beginning to get the picture of the whole gospel and how it builds together our picture of the relationship of the Son to the Father, especially as the Son came to earth as a man to reveal the Father to us.

# data[].attributes.body
The Basilica of the Holy Blood (Dutch: Heilig-Bloedbasiliek, French: Basilique du Saint-Sang) is a Roman Catholic basilica in Bruges, Belgium. The church houses a relic of the Holy Blood allegedly collected by Joseph of Arimathea and brought from the Holy Land by Thierry of Alsace, Count of Flanders. Built between 1134 and 1157 as the chapel of the Count of Flanders, it was promoted to a minor basilica in 1923. This relic was actually stolen at one point, but then returned some time later after it was believed to be bad luck.

# data[].attributes.headline
3 Scientifically Proven Eucharistic Miracles.

# data[].attributes.subject
3 Scientifically Proven Eucharistic Miracles.

# data[].attributes.body
Channel: Catholic 365 on YouTube.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 Scientifically Proven Eucharistic Miracles

# data[].attributes.body
True Cross, Christian relic, reputedly the wood of the cross on which Jesus Christ was crucified. Legend relates that the True Cross was found by St. Helena, mother of Constantine the Great, during her pilgrimage to the Holy Land about 326.

# data[].attributes.body
The sandals are the remains of an ornate fabric shoe (slipper) allegedly given to the Abbey by Pepin the Short in the Carolingian period (7th to 9th centuries).

They are mentioned by Pepin in the deed of 762, and he is said to have received them from Rome as a gift of Pope Stephen II. Stephen and Pepin first met at Ponthion in 754 on January 6, Epiphany, a feast day that commemorates the Magi presenting gifts to the Christ child. The chronicle of Count Nibelung says that the pope bestowed many gifts on the king and his retinue. Apart from its religious significance, the relic was the physical embodiment of the Frankish king's legitimization by the church.

Pepin managed the expansion of the small Prüm Abbey over 30 years, leaving it as a huge property named Saint Salvador (Holy Savior), the favorite monastery of the Carolingian dynasty, which was legitimized by the relic. The sandals never became the focus of a formal liturgical cult.

# data[].attributes.body
Some claim that this could be the tomb that Jesus was put in after being taken down from the cross. This tomb is located in The Edicule in Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

# data[].attributes.body
It is said that this is the robe that Jesus had worn. It is a brown color and it looks to be quite old. It is kept in a place called Patriarchal Svetitskhoveli Cathedral.

# data[].attributes.body
Relics that are claimed to be the Holy Nails with which Jesus was crucified are objects of veneration among some Christians, particularly Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox. In Christian symbolism and art, they figure among the  Arma Christi or Instruments of the Passion, the objects associated with the Passion of Jesus. Like the other Instruments, the Holy Nails have become an object of veneration among many Christians and have been pictured in paintings.

The authenticity of these relics is doubtful. The Catholic Encyclopedia wrote:

Very little reliance can be placed upon the authenticity of the thirty or more holy nails which are still venerated, or which have been venerated until recent times, in such treasuries as that of Santa Croce in Rome, or those of Venice, Aachen, the Escurial, Nuremberg, Prague, etc. Probably the majority began by professing to be facsimiles which had touched or contained filings from some other nail whose claim was more ancient. Without conscious fraud on the part of anyone, it is very easy for imitations in this way to come in a very brief space of time to be reputed originals.

It is not clear whether Jesus was crucified with three or with four nails, and the question has been long debated. The belief that three nails were used is called Triclavianism.

# data[].attributes.body
The three Biblical gospels that mention the crown of thorns do not say what happened to it after the crucifixion. The oldest known mention of the crown already being adored as a relic was made by Paulinus of Nola, writing after 409, who refers to the crown as a relic that was adored by the faithful (Epistle Macarius in Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXI, 407). Cassiodorus (c. 570) speaks of the crown of thorns among other relics which were "the glory" of the city of Jerusalem. "There", he says, "we may behold the thorny crown, which was only set upon the head of Our Redeemer in order that all the thorns of the world might be gathered together and broken" (Migne, LXX, 621). When Gregory of Tours in De gloria martyri avers that the thorns in the crown still looked green, a freshness which was miraculously renewed each day, he does not much strengthen the historical authenticity of a relic he had not seen, but the Breviary of Jerusalem a short text dated to about 530 AD), and the itinerary of Antoninus of Piacenza (6th century)  clearly state that the crown of thorns was then shown in the "Basilica of Mount Zion," although there is uncertainty about the actual site to which the authors refer.  From these fragments of evidence and others of later date (the "Pilgrimage" of the monk Bernard shows that the relic was still at Mount Zion in 870), it is shown that a purported crown of thorns was venerated at Jerusalem in the first centuries of the common era.

# data[].attributes.headline
Build Of Jesus #1. (Made for ᴡʜᴀᴛ ᴅɪᴅ ᴊᴇꜱᴜꜱ ʟᴏᴏᴋ ʟɪᴋᴇ?)

# data[].attributes.subject
Build Of Jesus #1. (Made for ᴡʜᴀᴛ ᴅɪᴅ ᴊᴇꜱᴜꜱ ʟᴏᴏᴋ ʟɪᴋᴇ?)

# data[].attributes.body
This is what I mean when I say that Jesus might have had darker skin, shorter hair, a beard, and brown eyes. The average looking 1st century Palestinian.

# data[].attributes.body
Q: Why does God put me in uncomfortable situations?

A: God shows us our weakness so that we learn to rely on his strength. And when the God of all comfort makes you uncomfortable, it is because he is stirring you up to a greater level of spiritual awareness and growth. Revelation 3:19: As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scientific Evidence of Eucharistic Miracles.

# data[].attributes.subject
Scientific Evidence of Eucharistic Miracles.

# data[].attributes.body
Channel: The Joy Of The Faith on YouTube.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inspired By Carlo Acutis - Scientific Evidence of Eucharistic Miracles

# data[].attributes.body
The most famous relic is a blackened skull, displayed in a golden reliquary at the basilica of Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume, in Southern France, which has been described as "one of the most precious [relics] in all Christendom" and "one of the world's most famous sets of human remains". Other relics said to have belonged to Mary Magdalene include a foot bone located at the basilica of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini in Italy, a left hand located at the Simonopetra Monastery in Greece and a tooth displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.

The purported skull of Mary Magdalene was analyzed in 1974 and has remained sealed inside a glass case since then. Analysis of the skull and photographs of hair found on it indicate it belonged to a woman who was around 50 years old and of Mediterranean descent. However, because the Catholic Church has not allowed removal of any portion of the skull for dating, the year of the woman's death has not been determined as of 2023.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the best ways to find out what Jesus was like is to read the New Testament, especially the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). They will tell you exactly what Jesus was like, which is the way that He is still today. My encouragement is to do that, but here are some insights of His personality and mannerisms:

Matthew 11:29 - Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

John 14:8–10 - Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work

Philippians 5:9 - In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus, Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man,He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,

Jesus was kind, compassionate, humble and loving and a true servant, yet at the same time was firm in not compromising the truth because He was and still is the truth.

John 14:6 - Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

This may give a little insight, but again, to understand who He really is, you need to read the Bible for yourself. There are lots of good, understandable versions out there that have stayed true to the original manuscripts while updating to a more current language. So,read the Bible about Jesus for yourself.

# data[].attributes.body
Q: Did Jesus have siblings?

A: The link above has answers. I’ll list some more articles here:

https://www.catholic.com/video/did-jesus-have-brothers

https://www.catholic.com/tract/brethren-of-the-lord

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why do Catholics teach that Mary was a virgin throughout her life when the Bible clearly says that Jesus had brothers? Ever been asked that?

Let me offer four reasons:

1. The Meaning of Brother

The first thing to understand is that the term brother (Gk. adelphos) has a broader meaning than uterine brothers. It can mean a biological brother, but it can also mean an extended relative, or even a spiritual brother.

Take Genesis 13:8for example. Here the word brother is being used to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot, who were not biological brothers but uncle and nephew:

"So Abram said to Lot, "Let's not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herdsmen and mine, for we are brothers" (Gen 13:8, NIV; see also 14:12).

Because of the Bible's broad semantic range of "brother," we can rest assured that although St. Paul writes, "[Jesus] appeared to more than five hundred...brothers at the same time" (1 Cor. 15:6), we need not infer from this verse that Mary gave birth to more than 500 children!

2. Children of Mary?

These "brothers" are never once called the children of Mary, although Jesus himself is (John 2:1; Acts 1:14).

3. Other Women Named Mary

James and Joseph (also called Joses), who are called Jesus' "brothers" (Mark 6:3) are indeed the children of Mary-Just not Mary, the mother of Jesus.

After St. Matthew's account of the crucifixion and death of Jesus, he writes:

"There were also many women there, looking on from afar, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him; among who were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee." (Matt. 27:56; see also Mark 15:40).

4. Consensus of the Early Church

The earliest explanation of the "brothers" of the Lord is found in a document known as the Protoevangelium of James, which was written around A.D. 150. It speaks of Mary as a consecrated virgin since her youth, and of St. Joseph as an elderly widower with children who was chosen to be Mary's spouse for the purposes of guarding and protecting her while respecting her vow of virginity. Though this document is not on the level of Sacred Scripture, it was written very early, and it may contain accurate historical traditions.

Allow me to limit myself to three quotes from the early Church:
Athanasius of Alexandria
"Therefore let those who deny that the Son is from the Father by nature and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh of Mary Ever-Virgin [ Four Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 (c. A.D. 360)].
St. Jerome
"You say that Mary did not continue a virgin: I claim still more that Joseph himself, on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born [ Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary 21 (A.D. 383)].
Pope St. Leo I
"The origin is different but the nature alike: not by intercourse with man but by the power of God was it brought about: for a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and a Virgin she remained [ Sermons 22:2 (A.D. 450)].

Thus the same Church today affirm:

Jesus is Mary's only son, but her spiritual motherhood extends to all men whom indeed he came to save: "The Son whom she brought forth is he whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren, that is, the faithful in whose generation and formation she co-operates with a mother's love ( Catechism of the Catholic Church 501).

Did you like this content? Please help keep us ad-free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why do Catholics teach that Mary was a virgin throug...

# data[].attributes.body
Q: Is Christianity/Catholicism the true religion?

A: Yes, Christianity is the one true religion. That may sound awfully dogmatic and narrow-minded, but the simple truth is that Christianity is the only true religion. Jesus said that He alone was the way to the Father (John 14:6) – that He alone revealed the Father (Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:22).  Christians do not go around saying Christianity is the only way because they are arrogant, narrow-minded, stupid, and judgmental.  They do so because they believe what Jesus said.  They believe in Jesus, who claimed to be God (John 8:58; Exodus 3:14), who forgave sins (Mark 2:5; Luke 5:20; 7:48), and who rose from the dead (Luke 24:24-29; John 2:19f).  Jesus said that He was the only way.  Jesus is unique.  He was either telling the truth, He was crazy, or He was a liar.  But since everyone agrees that Jesus was a good man, how then could He be both good and crazy or good and a liar? He had to be telling the truth.  He is the only way.

Christianity is not just a religion; it is a relationship with God.  It is trusting in Jesus and what He did on the cross (1 Cor. 15:1-4) – not on what you can do for yourself (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Buddha didn’t rise from the dead, nor did Confucius or Zoroaster.  Muhammad didn’t fulfill any detailed prophecies.  Alexander the Great didn’t raise the dead or heal the sick.  And though there is far less reliable information written about them, people believed in them.

The scripture is right when it says in 1 Pet. 2:7-8, “This precious value, then, is for you who believe.  But for those who disbelieve, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, this became the very cornerstone,’ and, ‘A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense’; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom, they were also appointed.” Muhammad or any other specific worshipped person in any other religion didn't do anything.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Traditional site of Golgotha in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

# data[].attributes.headline
Calvary; Place Where Jesus was Crucified.

# data[].attributes.subject
Calvary; Place Where Jesus was Crucified.

# data[].attributes.body
Calvary (Latin: Calvariae or Calvariae locus) or Golgotha (Greek: Γολγοθᾶ, translit. Golgothâ) was a site immediately outside Jerusalem's walls where, according to Christianity's four canonical gospels, Jesus was crucified.

Since at least the early medieval period, it has been a destination for pilgrimage. The exact location of Calvary has been traditionally associated with a place now enclosed within one of the southern chapels of the multidenominational Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a site said to have been recognized by the Roman empress Helena, mother of Constantine the Great, during her visit to the Holy Land in 325.

Other locations have been suggested: in the 19th century, Protestant scholars proposed a different location near the Garden Tomb on Green Hill (now "Skull Hill") about 500 m (1,600 ft) north of the traditional site and historian Joan Taylor has more recently proposed a location about 175 m (574 ft) to its south-southeast.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the unknowns of the New Testament is the identification of the mountain where Jesus underwent his Transfiguration. The Matthew account of the Transfiguration is as follows:

“And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only. And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.” (Matthew 17:1–9, KJV)

Several candidates for this mountain have been suggested:

Mount Tabor

Mount Tabor (575 metres or 1,886 feet high) is the traditional location. The earliest identification of the Mount of Transfiguration as Tabor is by Origen in the 3rd century. It is also mentioned by St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Jerome in the 4th century. It is later mentioned in the 5th-century Transitus Beatae Mariae Virginis. The summit of Mount Tabor is also referenced as the place of the Transfiguration according to the Mystical City of God by Venerable Mary of Jesus of Ágreda (1602–1665), who writes: "For His Transfiguration He selected a high mountain in the center of Galilee, two leagues east of Nazareth and called Mount Tabor." The Church of the Transfiguration is located atop Mount Tabor.

Mount Hermon

Mount Hermon (2,814 metres or 9,232 feet high) was suggested by J. Lightfoot (1602–1675) and R. H. Fuller (1915–2007) for two reasons: It is the highest site in the area [given that the Transfiguration took place on "a high mountain" (Matthew 17:1)], and it is located near Caesarea Philippi (Matthew 16:13), where the previous events reportedly took place.

Other locations

Other locations that have been proposed include: one of the Horns of Hattin, by R. W. Stewart (1857); Gebel Germaq (1,208 metres), 5 kilometres southwest of Safed, by W. Ewing (1906); Tel El-Ahmar (1,452 metres) on Jabal al-Druze, by Gustav Dalman(1924); Mount Nebo by H. A. Whittaker (1987); and Mount Sinai by Benjamin Urrutia. Others, such as A. Loisy (1908), have deliberately rejected seeking a geographical location.

# data[].attributes.body
Jesus' Blood Type:

With Eucharistic miracles, and with blood findings on the Shroud of Turin, I can safely conclude that his blood type, was AB.

Jesus' Religion:

Of course, Jesus was a Jew. He was born of a Jewish mother, in Galilee, a Jewish part of the world. All of his friends, associates, colleagues, disciples, all of them were Jews. He regularly worshipped in Jewish communal worship, what we call synagogues.

Jesus' Language:

There exists a consensus among scholars that the language of Jesus and his disciples was Aramaic. Aramaic was the common language of Judea in the first century AD. The villages of Nazareth and Capernaum in Galilee, where Jesus spent most of his time, were Aramaic-speaking communities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gethsemane: Place where Jesus prayed before being arrested.

# data[].attributes.subject
Gethsemane: Place where Jesus prayed before being arrested.

# data[].attributes.body
Gethsemane (/ɡɛθˈsɛməni/) is a garden at the foot of the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem where, according to the four Gospels of the New Testament, Jesus Christ underwent the agony in the garden and was arrested before his crucifixion. It is a place of great resonance in Christianity. There are several small olive groves in church property, all adjacent to each other and identified with biblical Gethsemane.

# data[].attributes.headline
Jesus' (Supposed) Job (Before His Ministry) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Jesus' (Supposed) Job (Before His Ministry) 

# data[].attributes.body
Anyone who is familiar with the New Testament will tell you about Jesus’ profession as a carpenter. The idea of a young Jesus, carving and shaping wood as he would one day reshape lives, is extremely prevalent throughout Christianity.

But was Jesus actually a carpenter?

Here, we take a closer look at Jesus the carpenter as He is depicted in the scriptures, and consider the possibility that what we know as carpentry might not be the same vocation that the young Jesus studied before he began His ministry.

Why Do People Say Jesus Was a Carpenter?

The idea that Jesus was a carpenter comes directly from the New Testament of the Bible. In the Book of Mark, which many biblical scholars believe to be the first written of the Four Gospels, those who heard Jesus teach in the synagogue in His hometown and knew His family asked “Isn’t this the carpenter?” demonstrating their disbelief in his teachings (Mark 6:24). The book of Matthew echoes this scene but instead attributes the profession to Joseph, Jesus’ adopted father, with onlookers asking “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son?” (Matthew 13:55).

In either case, it would be interpreted by the scriptures' original audiences that, yes, Jesus worked in carpentry. At the time it was common for a son to take up his father’s profession, and Matthew might have wanted to demonstrate that Jesus was trained in carpentry even if He was not currently engaged in the work itself.

Was Jesus a carpenter? He was, but that doesn’t necessarily mean what we sometimes assume it means.

What Did ‘Carpenter’ Mean in Ancient Jerusalem?

When we read the Bible, it can be easy to fall into the trap of forgetting that the scriptures were originally written in languages that have all but been lost to time. The English versions are essentially translations of translations, and in certain cases translators may have chosen words that were subtly different from the words in the original manuscripts. On top of that, even among English versions, there is archaic terminology that carried with it different connotations at the time the work was translated. This can make it difficult to pin down the exact meaning of certain terms. Many biblical scholars believe that this is the case with ‘carpentry.’

Today, a carpenter is someone who works with wood. But did the original term in Ancient Greek (the language that the Gospels were first written in) mean the same thing? There is evidence to suggest that the scriptures originally identified Jesus and Joseph as being of the ‘tektōn’ profession, meaning they were craftsmen or builders. This doesn’t preclude them from working with wood, but it does open up other possibilities as well.

Although wood was certainly available in ancient Jerusalem, most structures of that era were constructed primarily of stone. If we take ‘carpenter’ to mean ‘builder,’ it is conceivable that Jesus would have needed to understand masonry techniques in addition to knowing how to shape wood. For Jesus, carpenter work may have been more about working with limestone rather than timber. And, if we expand the definition further to include all-purpose craftsmen, then we may be looking at an occupation that is similar to a modern handyman, skilled in a variety of building and repair work.

Finally, it’s worth recognizing that the language spoken by Jesus and his disciples was probably Aramaic. The term carpenter may correspond with the Aramaic word ‘naggar,’ meaning ‘a learned man.’ If so, this casts a different light on Jesus' educational upbringing. That said, it may be difficult to rationalize this interpretation with the incredulous response of Jesus’ audience when they used his status as a ‘carpenter’ as an insult.

Why Did the Gospel Writers Include this Detail?

Given how firmly the idea of Jesus as a carpenter is entrenched in Christianity’s collective psyche, it may be surprising for some to learn that only one scriptural account (presented by two different authors) makes any reference to His profession at all. So why did the authors bother to include it?

The most obvious answer is maybe they were sharing an account of something that happened and didn’t want to leave out any details.

Perhaps it’s more likely that the writers wanted to demonstrate Jesus’ low-born status, and how there were many who could not look beyond their own preconceptions to see that the Messiah had finally come. The audience’s dismissive attitude towards Jesus' teachings, simply because they knew Him from His youth and knew His family, is representative of human nature’s tendency to reject the exceptional when it is found in the familiar. It was probably easy for the people of Nazareth to accept ancient prophets and great works to come; they had a harder time believing that one of their own might actually be the fulfillment of prophecy that they had been waiting for.

# data[].attributes.headline
What was Jesus like as a child? How was his childhood?

# data[].attributes.subject
What was Jesus like as a child? How was his childhood?

# data[].attributes.body
Jesus as a child

The environment in which Jesus grew up was complicated by religious and political forces at work in Judea and the surrounding territories. Many acknowledge Jesus’ birthplace was Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7), a city long associated with the family of David.

Jesus would not stay long in His ancestral city. Shortly after His birth, Joseph and Mary brought Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22-38). Within months, the family would journey by night to Egypt to escape the murderous rampage of King Herod (Matthew 2:13-18). In Egypt, the family found safe haven until Herod’s death, when the family returned home.

But Jesus did not grow up in the area of Bethlehem or Jerusalem. Instead, Jesus’ childhood home was in Nazareth, a city of Galilee (Matthew 2:19-23; Luke 2:39).

Luke 2:40 gives a summary statement describing Jesus’ development from infancy to age 12: “And the Child grew and became strong in spirit, filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him.”

Jesus’ family life

Jesus grew up in a bustling, growing family. Matthew makes clear that Joseph and Mary did not have children before Jesus’ birth (Matthew 1:24-25). However, the Bible tells us Jesus had several younger half-siblings, children of Joseph and Mary.

His stepfather, Joseph, was a carpenter (verse 55). This occupation is generally understood to be someone who works with wood. However, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary explains this word “can mean ‘carpenter’—one who works with wood—or perhaps even ‘builder,’ in a time and place when most homes were made of mud brick” (Revised Edition, 2010, Vol. 9, p. 384).

This occupation would require skill, patience and hard work—all traits Jesus would have observed during His childhood.

Jesus was an exceptional Child

Jesus experienced a natural maturing process similar to any growing boy, but He was especially endowed with God’s Spirit and favor from birth so that He was far advanced beyond other young men when it came to grasping the Word of God and spiritual principles.

Interestingly, Luke’s account of Jesus’ life tells of something that took place when Jesus was 12 years of age. There is much we can learn from this fascinating story, which is only found in the Gospel of Luke.

Luke 2:43-44 begins to give some interesting insight into the dynamics of Jesus’ special family. After the festivals, as the family caravan was a day’s journey from Jerusalem on their way toward home, it was discovered that Jesus was not with the group. How could they have gone so far without realizing this?

First of all, Jesus must have been a boy who had earned His parents’ confidence and trust. Joseph and Mary were obviously relying on Jesus to act in a responsible manner during the trip home from Jerusalem.

They had learned by this time that their oldest child was a very reliable, capable and dependable youth. Had He been unpredictable or immature, then they would have felt the need to oversee His whereabouts more closely. But apparently they had no reason to expect anything out of the ordinary.

They were startled to find that He was not with the caravan. Filled with concern, they spent the next day traveling back to Jerusalem with great consternation, hoping to find Him safe.Joseph and Mary assumed He was traveling with another family or relatives and didn’t inquire as to His whereabouts until later that day. This was understandable behavior on their part since there was no way they could have envisioned anything other than reliable conduct from their Son and a normal trip home to Nazareth after the Passover festival.

They were startled to find that He was not with the caravan. Filled with concern, they spent the next day traveling back to Jerusalem with great consternation, hoping to find Him safe.

The boy Jesus at the temple

It appears it was on the third day after the festival that they found Him in the temple area. He was not playing with other boys, lost or even scared to be on His own. He was instead involved in serious discussions with some of the learned teachers of the law in Jerusalem, “both listening to them and asking them questions” (Luke 2:46).

Rather than being annoyed by one so youthful, these intelligent men were astounded by Jesus’ questions and responses and, most importantly, by His grasp of deep theological topics. Luke’s account says, “All who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers” (verse 47). Truly they were in the presence of a very divinely gifted young man.

Once He was located, Joseph and Mary were relieved to find Jesus safe. Yet at the same time they were bewildered by their Son’s surprising behavior and seeming lack of appreciation for the anxiousness He had caused.

Mary took the lead in asking what it all meant. It seems Joseph remained quiet for the moment and allowed her to speak for them both. Perhaps it was because Jesus was conceived in her womb or because, being a concerned mother, she was the one more emotionally distraught after the days of searching, but Mary now sought an answer from her Son.

Jesus’ mother showed wisdom and self-control in that she first inquired about her Son’s intent. She asked in verse 48, “Son, why have You done this to us? Look, Your father and I have sought You anxiously.”

Many parents would automatically allow their frustration or anger to dictate their action and might lash out at their child for causing such distress, but she apparently knew her Son had never been irresponsible or rebellious and so she sought an honest understanding of what He was doing.

If you want to know more on Jesus’ childhood, you should perhaps look to the apocryphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which will be linked down here: https://www.gospels.net/infancythomas

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
¡Impresionante! (This is Spanish version)

# data[].attributes.body
ENGLISH VERSION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OCBvyujouc

If you do not understand what the miracle is, look at the Eucharist. It is beating like a heart. You need to look really close.

# data[].attributes.body
The common Christian traditional dating of the birthdate of Jesus was 25 December, a date first asserted officially by Pope Julius I in 350 AD, although this claim is dubious or otherwise unfounded. The day or season has been estimated by various methods, including the description of shepherds watching over their sheep.

The date of birth of Jesus is not stated in the gospels or in any historical sources, but most biblical scholars generally accept a date of birth between 6 BC and 4 BC, the year in which King Herod died. The historical evidence is too incomplete to allow a definitive dating, but the year is estimated through three different approaches:

analysing references to known historical events mentioned in the nativity accounts in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew,
working backward from the estimation of the start of the ministry of Jesus, and
astrological or astronomical alignments.
How wonderful it would be if Our Lord had been born in the age of information technology or even when the public records office issued birth certificates. Alas, the Gospels do not provide such information. Nevertheless, some scriptural detective work can help determine the date of Christ’s birth.

St. Luke related the announcement of the birth of St. John the Baptist to his elderly parents, St. Zechariah and St. Elizabeth. St. Zechariah was a priest of the class of Abijah (Lk 1:5), the eighth class of 24 priestly classes (Neh 12:17). Each class served one week in the temple, twice a year.

Josef Heinrich Friedlieb has established that the priestly class of Abijah would have been on duty during the second week of the Jewish month Tishri, the week of the Day of Atonement or in our calendar, between Sept. 22 and 30. While on duty, the Archangel Gabriel informed Zechariah that he and Elizabeth would have a son (Lk 1:5-24). Thereupon, they conceived John, who after presumably 40 weeks in the womb would have been born at the end of June. For this reason, we celebrate the Nativity of St. John the Baptist June 24.

St. Luke also recorded how the Archangel Gabriel told Mary that Elizabeth was six months pregnant with John (Lk 1:36), which means the Annunciation occurred March 25, as we celebrate. Nine months from March 25, or six months from June 24, renders the birth of Christ at Dec. 25, our Christmas.

On a pious note, would not our Blessed Mother herself have remembered all of these details, especially how she conceived by the Holy Spirit and bore the Savior? Surely. All mothers — including my own — remember these details. Would not the apostles have asked her these questions, at least after the Ascension? Would not St. Luke, who included the details of the Annunciation and Visitation, not have learned them from our Blessed Mother? Pope Benedict in his book Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives noted this very point: “Luke indicates from time to time that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, is herself one of his sources, especially when he says in 2:51 that ‘His mother kept all these things in her heart’ (cf. also 2:19) Only she could report the event of the Annunciation, for which there were no human witnesses. … To sum up: What Matthew and Luke set out to do, each in his own way, was not to tell ‘stories’ but to write history, real history that had actually happened, admittedly interpreted and understood in the context of the word of God.” So given the facts of the Gospel, we discover the date of Christmas.

Now if this dating is true, then the early church must have celebrated Christmas Dec. 25. Is there evidence? Admittedly, evidence is sparse because Christianity and the church were persecuted by the Roman Empire until 313, and no one knows how much evidence has been lost. Nevertheless, according to the Liber Pontificalis, Pope St. Telesphorus (125-136) instituted the tradition of celebrating midnight Mass, which means Christmas already was being celebrated. St. Theophilus (AD 115-181), bishop of Caesarea, stated, “We ought to celebrate the birthday of Our Lord on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” St. Hippolytus (170-240) mentioned in his Commentary on Daniel that the birth of Christ occurred Dec. 25.

After Constantine legalized Christianity in 313, the church was able to establish universal dates for the celebration of feast days, including Christmas and the Annunciation. As such, evidence shows the celebration of Christmas Dec. 25: Pope Liberius (352-66) celebrated Christmas Mass in Rome; St. Gregory Nazianzus (d. 389) in Constantinople, and St. Ambrose (d. 397) in Milan. Keep in mind that they would not have just “picked a date,” but used the date already accepted by the church.

So what about Christmas being substituted for the pagan holidays? The Romans did celebrate Saturnalia between Dec. 17 and 23, commemorating the winter solstice Dec. 23, but Christmas does not fit that time frame.

What about the “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun” Dec. 25? Emperor Aurelian instituted this celebration in 274 (therefore, after the Christian celebration of Christmas and perhaps to overshadow it). After legalization in 313, Dec. 25 was purged of any pagan notion: For example, an ancient codex of that time marked Dec. 25 as the “Nativity of the Unconquered” (meaning Jesus), not the “Nativity of the Unconquered Sun.” Then again, Emperor Julian the Apostate (reigned 361-63), who had apostatized and wanted to return the empire to paganism, tried to suppress Christmas and ordered the celebration of the Birth of the Unconquered Sun, a decision reversed upon his death. In sum, Christmas was celebrated Dec. 25 prior to any pagan celebration on the same date. (See Taylor Marshall’s The Eternal City: Rome and the Origins of Christianity).

While we can’t verify the date of Christmas, the most important point is celebrating the birth of Our Lord. Remember “Christmas” is derived from the Old English Cristes Maesse, which means “The Mass of Christ.” This Christmas, may we lift up our hearts at the holy sacrifice of the Mass and receive Our Lord, born again into our souls through the grace of the holy Eucharist.

# data[].attributes.body
Letter of Pilate to Caesar about Jesus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Acta Pilate (Letter of Pilate to Caesar about Jesus, His Crucifixion & Resurrection) - ARCHKO VOL.