xunzian

They have discovered tombs underneath the CotHS, but I do think Zenaphobe's explanation is probably a good one, but I do think the location of both burial places would have a great deal of ritual significance to Christians.

As for JS, you are placing a lot of weight on a text that we know is suspect. The Bible contains all sorts of fabrications (and contradictions) to help the narrative along, so I'm actually less inclined to take it as authoritative over an enduring tradition. Besides, saying, "He was buried on *that hill*" isn't difficult information to pass along.

Amaleq13

Don't be such a baby. Think of the cloning potential!

Johnny Skeptic

What do you mean? You know that I do not believe that the texts are true.

The texts say that the only people who saw Jesus' body put in Joseph's tomb were Mary Magdalene, another woman, Joseph, and a helper. Other than the supposed guards, the only way that anyone else could have known about where the body was buried would have been if one of those four people told other people that the body had been put in Joseph's tomb. What evidence is there that any of those four people told other people that the body had been put in Joseph's tomb?

If the body was moved, which Richard Carrier and other skeptics believe is plausible, obviously, it does not matter where it was originally put.

Back then, if God had really wanted most people to believe that Jesus rose from the dead, he would not have had any trouble doing that. Such being the case, it is reasonable to assume that he is not trying to accomplish that now.

xunzian

Of course you don't. That's why I think tradition is a better source than the Bible. Where they would seem to conflict, I side with tradition.

And why wouldn't it matter where Jesus was originally put?

Johnny Skeptic

A better source for what, for where Jesus' body was actually put? I started this thread in order to discuss where Jesus' body was actually put, not where tradition said his body was put.

Notsri

I would just advise to not allow Carrier's article to be the final word for you on the subject of Jewish burial customs. He misuses his sources quite a bit, and at times stumbles because of misunderstanding and consequent misinterpretation. It would be wise not to view him as an authority on the topic, not least because he sometimes errs in the most basic of information relative to rabbinic studies. Better for you would be the various books and articles by the likes of Raymond Brown, Byron McCane, Jodi Magness, Rachel Hachlili, David Kraemer, etc.; from them you'll get a much more informed view. If you're interested, let me know; I'll point you in the direction of what at least I know they've written.

Johnny Skeptic

It all gets down to who first actually claimed that Jesus was buried in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, when they made the claim, and where they got their information from. Does anyone have any credible historical evidence regarding those issues?

paarsurrey

Hi

Since you have recently finished the book of Richard Carrier could you please tell us as to when and according to which tradition ,Jewish or Christian, funeral rites of Jesus were performed and who and how many people attended the ceremoney?

According to Jews he was a blasphemous person; was it allowed for such a person to offer funeral rites as per Jewish tradition?

There were a lot of fragrant herbals collected by Nikodimus a Physician, such as murr and aleo, I think about 40 Kilos of them; was it customary to apply such an exhorbitant quantity of herbals on the body of a dead man?

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Toto

These are serious charges. Can you detail exactly how he misuses his sources? Do you have a link to a review?

Iasion

Hi xunzian,

So -

or
Which is it ?


There are believers who support four different tombs :
2 in Jerusalem, 1 in Kashmir, 1 in Japan.

All equally mythical.


Iasion