mountainman

Or was the tomb located outside the walls?

Best wishes


Pete Brown

andrewcriddle

IIUC and IMS the archaeology suggests that although the current site of the holy sepulchre was certainly well within the walls of Jerusalem at the time of Constantine and had been for a long time before, it was probably outside the walls of Jerusalem in the 30's CE.

Andrew Criddle

mountainman

Thanks Andrew,

This seems to me to be something which should be
able to be checked and verified. Obviously here, the
point is that anyone, criminal or otherwise, buried in
any ancient city, would have been buried or entombed
outside the city walls for health reasons.

If the site now occupied by Constantine's fourth century
makeover of "the monument of his most holy Passion"
was inside the walls of Jerusalem c.33 CE, then either
the burial account has been fabricated, or Constantine
found the wrong tomb.

From elsewhere ....

Surely there were town boundaries?



Best wishes,


Pete Brown

schilling.klaus

The tomb is to be located metaphysically, not geographically as hilariously naive scholars do.
Thus already the Orphics knew correctly that the flesh-and-bone body is the tomb of the soul (soma sema).
This is applied here to Jesus, the world soul.

Klaus Schilling

mountainman

The author of NHC 6.1 speaks of "the city of Nine Gates".
This is the tomb of the embodied soul - the human body.
The same term is found in the Gita way BCE.
The author of NHC 6.1 was not a christian.

Archaeologicially however wherever Constantine
later located the red herring, if it was inside the
city walls of Jerusalem it was a first century
health hazzard, and bad for rats.


Best wishes,


Pete Brown

andrewcriddle

Kathleen Kenyon's arguments that the site was outside the wall at the time of the crucifixion can be found here http://books.google.com/books?id=Psz...82i8lOK5Frxy-o

Andrew Criddle

Ben C Smith

The fact that the site of the tomb was inside the walls of Jerusalem in the patristic period has been urged as an argument that the site is genuine, since if someone wished to invent a site for the tomb he or she would probably have placed it outside the walls in his or her own time. That kind of argument is probably not very persuasive, but it does perhaps seem to suggest that, whenever the site was chosen (whether as a genuine tomb for Jesus or as a place to attach the story), it was still outside the walls at that time.

(I myself have no strong feelings either way.)

Ben.

Toto

Every Pilgrim's Guide to the Holy Land?

No previews available (in the US).

stuart shepherd

According to the Bible..........

Jesus was executed outside the city.
Hebrews 13:11-13 (King James Version)
11For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.

12Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

13Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

The tomb where Jesus was buried was right by the place where he was executed.
John 19:41-42 (King James Version)
41Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.

42There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

Therefore Jesus' tomb was outside of the city according to the Bible story.

Stuart Shepherd

Chili

I would argue that since we bury the bare naked ego the tomb is outside the city which itself (the city) is the soul of man wherein the Thousand Year Reign of God exists. The difference between the Old and the New Jerusalem is the presence of this ego death in the Old and the absence or victory over this ego death in the New Jesusalem. So the difference between the Old and the New is that the New is added to the Old wherefore Jesus entered the city riding 2 donkeys or a donkey and a colt to portray that he is the Alpha (the old) and the Omega (the new) indeed.

The tomb was hewn as if out of rock to say that as faith grew into the size and shape of the ark it was doubt that diminished into that little round hole at the bottom which nevertheless was the top in truth whence doubt came to be the antagonist in the mind of the arkbuilder (or truth could not have been).