I really enjoy the objective views that you give on your own hypothesis. Dr. Tabor proposes questions that even a skeptic would fail to ask. I'm sure your channel will keep on growing. Thanks for all the hard work.😊
As ever, puts so much in context; thank you once again.Thought-provoking but so clearly explained and ultimately most comforting - death is not the end;
My question: when the women found that the tomb was empty, and when they reported that to others, why did no one ask Joseph of Arimathea, the man who had put Jesus in that tomb?
the more interesting question is why were they at the tomb with herbs and spices.......... jesus had already been buried......... if they went to the tomb to pay respects, they would ve gone with a garland of flowers as they surely werre expecting to stand outside the tomb like you would do in any graveyard..........
Dr Tabor, I’ve bought a few of your books and studied some of your recommended reading list. It has been invaluable to me in sorting some of the problems I’ve had with the church in my adult life. Thank you. Edit for spelling
Dr. Tabor you really really need based on this great video series write a huge big book where your view of the Jesus death and burial timeline would be presented in great detail and with timelines and schematics and locations and maps (and also employing a zoom-in structure as the book proceeds so that the reader can follow reiterated and ever more detailed and precise formulations with more ease and that way slowly get a more nuanced view) and in which all the other opinions/objections by your colleagues would be addressed
Yet the New Testament gospels were written at the earliest almost a century after Jesus lived. In simple terms, the New Testament narrative of Jesus was not written by any eyewitness or anyone that ever knew him.
Few scholars believe any of the Gospels were written 120-130 years after Jesus, so I dont know where you got that from. Most scholars date Mark to the 60s or early 70s, so even if you take that dating that's 30-40 years after. Personally I think there is no reason why Mark could not have been written in the 50s. Even John, which many think was the last one to be written, was likely written in the 80s or 90s at the latest, that's 50-60 years later. Very few scholars think any of the Gospels were written in the 2nd century, particularly as we have 2nd century church fathers referring to the Gospel writings, such as Papias. You should read Richard Bauckham's book 'Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'. He's not a typical evangelical Christian writer, some would view him as 'liberal', but he is adamant the Gospels were written based on eyewitness testimony. Id recommend the 2nd ed.
Dr. Tabor, was Jesus buried twice and the second tomb was found empty or was the 1st tomb found empty because the body of Jesus had been moved to the second tomb? Thank you.
This is from out of left field, but there's a book I read many years ago called Dai Sho by Marc Olden, and I'm sure there's a reference in the book to a Japanese Buddhist belief about a small bone from the neck looked for after the body is cremated. The reference was to one such bone left over from the cremation of a samurai, the ugly shape of which indicated he would suffer in his next incarnation, and I did wonder where this belief originated.
Doctor Tabor, do you think it's plausible that the Passover happened on the weekly sabbath? That coincincidence did actually happened on the years 30 and 33. That would account for the tradition of crucifixion on a Friday morning, but leaves Jesus dead before the Passover, and therefore the last supper would not be a Passover Meal.
This is all very fascinating but if there really was an "empty" tomb the apologetics would be quite developed within a few days or weeks - certainly by the time Paul is writing - and yet it seems obvious that the gospels according to Matthew, Luke, John, Peter are responding to questions that arose in response to Mark's account.
Interesting theory. I wonder why Joseph of Arimathea and the people in his party didn't tell any of the women present at Jesus's crucifixion and death that they'd be coming by early to re-bury Jesus's body in a nicer tomb (or, at least, why the writer of the Gospel of Mark didn't bother to include such a crucial bit of information): "Hey folks, no need to panic about Jesus's missing corpse! It was all just a somewhat confused, extended burial process due to Shabbos and Passover happening back-to-back. After Shabbos was over, we simply returned to Jesus's temporary tomb under cover of darkness to transport the corpse to a nicer tomb and, for whatever reason, we completely failed to tell Jesus's mourning family members and closest followers that this is what we were going to do with their loved one's corpse." That aside, do you think the writer of the Gospel According to St. Mark interpreted his own empty tomb narrative in the same way Dr. Tabor interprets it?
Joseph of Arimathea wouldn't have had time. He had to get permission from (read bribe) Pilate to bury the body temporarily, organize transportation that wouldn't draw any attention, going at night from Talpiot (Arimathea?) and back. And he could have left a young man to inform the mourners of what he was doing--which message and follow on could well have been edited. Pilate would have insisted it be done at night so as not to make it appear that the body of a crucified traitor was being honored. And since Pilate was in on it, it makes the story about the sleeping Roman guards to be the fiction it probably was, being only told in Matthew.
First Mark started his gospel with Mk 16:1-8 pageflip, then you would read Mk 1:1 Thus you would already observe the mirror parallels, and the three women were not latecomers to the story, but overshadow the story. So Mark uses the tomb as advertisement on page 1 of his quier of 5 folios and 20 pages. And the story answers the question what the women were afraid about (Mark drives Isis cultists into panick mode here). Of course in hindsight you would flop page 20 again a read in a circular fashion (galilee = circle, 12 instances in Mark). So there is a clash between the straight way and the circular way. Mark does idolize vanity which was just the flavour of the day. He does so by Nazareth too (it sits on a co-latitude of exactly 1 radians = universal ambition/hell). He also aludes to the Odysee which is another idolized vanity. Mark the deconvert is telling you his vanity adventure. You can decode all the reasons to his deconversion, as his story portrays more the conflicts of the church than Jesus. So what did Mark believe? Mark turned naturalist cynic. He gives one good example about what crossed his desk: Archimedes calculation of the number pi. It is encoded in the riddle of the one loaf using large and small baskets. The solutions are 22 and 7. Mark keeps his beliefs to himself but has one single outcoming when he adresses the scribes and copyists in the parable of the sower. And you can more than read his anti-authoritarian mindset, which creates Jesus in opposition to him as scribe. Yet Mark still does not advocate general literacy, which lets Mark run into his great paradox: the genius composer who depends on slave copyists yet appeals to an anti-authoritarian life. Concerning the resurrection Mark is an agnosticist.
@@mahlonmarr856 and with a little bit more imagination you could probably describe what he ate for lunch the day before, or what he gave as a gift at the birthday party he was invited to the following week. Your whole story-line breaks at the seams in more than one place, but the part about Pilate insisting the body be moved at night is particularly troubling because an unexplained empty tomb story would be counterproductive to the Jewish order that had him crucified. Since Pilate's interests would have been more centered on keeping the pesky Jewish unrest under control, purposefully orchestrating a narrative that made it look like Jesus rose from the dead when he was really being reburied elsewhere seems far fetched to say the least. And then I suppose your going to suggest that Joseph of A. secretly buried all the other people there without them knowing about it too?
None of the Gospels support Dr. Tabor's theory. Part of the problem is that the Gospels have been corrupted, and it leaves the door wide open to all sorts of speculation. Instead of counting the number of donkey's written into a forged Gospel, scholarship would be better spent if it at least tried to separate truth from fiction IMO.
Jesus' body would not have been left on the cross to rot as many seem to think. The Romans, during peace time, showed respect to the Jewish rituals and customs, including that a body must be buried before Sabbath. It was only during their war with the Jews 40 years later (which Jesus predicted) that the Romans left their bodies on the many thousands of crosses. So it was more likely than not that Jesus' body was buried, just as Paul said, in agreement with the Gospels.
@@leom6343 provide evidence that Jews crucified by the Romans during the 30s (ie peacetime) were either left to rot on their cross or were buried in mass graves, even where the family or Jewish authorities requested the body for burial.
They don’t have a single bone from the 12 holy tribes, profits, holy men and women and so on. They never knew who they were otherwise they would’ve destroyed their graves. Don’t ever forget what Jesus said about the priest at the temple and who wrote your New Testament
Death/Resurrection is part of the Fruit of Good/Evil, Day/Night, so on and so forth, the DUALITY of life that acts as a CHECK AND BALANCE and also Freedon of Choice, without it bad cannot be contained nor good have a hope...wait, am I becoming philosophical?.....
Joseph of Arimathea was exceedingly wealthy and was on the Sanhedrin, and most likely bribed Pilate, who would have insisted that Joseph move the body undercover of night. Joseph could even have been a Roman citizen, either by purchase, or by Herodian birthright, like Paul.
Rabbi Singer points to a glaring plot hole throughout the evolution of the resurrection myth Why would women let the body rot for three days and THEN apply unguents? That's not what was done. Within hours of death, they applied unguents and then buried the body. Male christian Greek writers from other cultures may not have known that.
The application of "unguents" was delayed by the Sabbath. The women's return was at first light after the Sabbath and less than 40 hours after the burial. FYI, because the Sabbath began at sunset on Friday, the no one had time to complete the burial process.
There's no way anyone moved the Body when the tomb was sealed and guarded by Roman centurions. It's amazing the stories people will come up with in order to not believe. 2 Thes 2 warning!
YES, That corpse of the person imaged on the Shroud HAVING GONE UP/RESURRECTED is described in the TORAH, Genesis 49:8-10 as that of God's Son, YOU ARE GONE UP", to whom shall the gathering of the people be. Genesis 49:8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. 9 Judah is a lion's whelp: FROM THE PREY MY SON, YOU ART GONE UP: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The SEPTER shall not depart from Judah, nor A LAWGIVER from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. HE FULFILLS Zechariah 6:12-13, as the "counsel of peace" who bears the glory of the ruler and priest on the throne.
Nowhere near as fantastic as those invented to get people to believe--4000 years and counting. God supposedly parted the Red Sea, and then 3 weeks later they were worshipping a golden calf in the very presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire that had saved them.
and no Roman centurions would have allowed any of Jesus's followers to get near the tomb either...and they weren't have ran away frightened either...because they would have executed by the governor if they had...
the gospel goes on to report that the centurions ran back to the priests and told them the story about Jesus...well the writer of Matthew would not have been able to know what if anything the centurions told the priests...for the writer wouldn't have been allowed in the priest's presence...nor would any follower of Jesus have dared to follow the guards...because the temple priest's guards would have arrested them before they got near the priests.
and the women at the tomb ran back to tell the disciples about the tomb incident...as the Roman guards were going to tell the priests...so who followed the guards to find out what they told the priests?....
Mark does not say that Jesus has risen to the heaven, but that he has ben rasied in the same way you would raise a corpse. Btw Mark started with 16:1-8 on page one of his 20 page quire. Thus you would get an idea about Isis cult gone wrong or something like that as an introduction and the story then acts as an explanation why the 3 women were frightened about.
There were 3 sacred languages: Hebrew, Sanskrit and Ancient Aramaic. In English we are speaking Hebrew backwards. There is no E F I J O V W in Abri 'Hebrew'. These sounds are achieved by adding so-called 'vowel points' (various dots and dashes) to the 'Hebrew' letters. Name Jesus has been used to replace REAL name Yahusha. (There was no J in Hebrew at that time). Yahu, Yahuah or shorter version YAH, sometimes used YHVH (not really correct according to 'Hebrew') - Real God's name Yahusha - Yahu Sha - Means Yah Saves / Yahu Saves (It's real name of 'Jesus'). Sha in 'Hebrew' comes from the root word yasha - it means salvation, deliverer, rescue. Yahuah - Our Creator Yahu is Savior Yahuah is Salvation Yahweh / Yahveh - false pagan god. Yahushua - is NOT God's name - it means 'Oh Yah I cry out' LORD - in Hebrew is Baal (Ba'al) Yahudah - Judah - Jew Messiah name is NOT Yeshua / Yashua Messiah name is Yahusha. Yahw - There are no names in scripture Yahu - There are 72 names in scripture Joshua -> YAHUshua = "YAHUAH is Salvation" Samuel -> ShamAHuel = "Listen to YAHUAH your Eloah" Isaiah -> YeshaYAHU = "Salvation is YAHUAH" Jeremiah -> YirmeYAHU "Resurrection/Rising is YAHUAH" Ezekiel -> YAHchezqel = "YAHUAH is a Righteous Eloah" Daniel -> DaniYAHel = "The decision is YAHUAH's our Eloah" Hosea -> HosheAH = "The Deliver is YAHUAH" Joel -> YAHel = "YAHUAH is Eloah" Amos -> AHmoce = "YAHUAH's Burden" Obadiah -> ObadYAHU = "The Servant of YAHUAH" Jonah -> YonAH = "YAHUAH provides Warmth Micah -> MiykahYAHU = "Who is like YAHUAH" Nahum -> NachUm = "Comfort comes from YAHUAH" Habakkuk -> ChabaqUq = "Embrace YAHUAH" Zephaniah- -> TsphanYAHU = "The Secret is YAHUAH" Haggai -> ChaggaYAH = "The Celebration is YAHUAH" Zechariah -> ZacharYAHU = "YAHUAH Remembers” Malachi -> MalakiYAH = “Messenger of YAHUAH" Job -> YAHshub = "YAHUAH Will Return” Ezra -> EzrAH = “Our Help is YAHUAH" Nehemiah -> NechemYAH = "Consoled by YAHUAH" Matthew -> MattithYAHU = "The gift is YAHUAH"
If Jesus of Nazareth's body was in a tomb, why is there no record of the Jews arguing that he was not resurrected, because his body was known to be in a tomb?
@@hanygeorge8603 false equivalence, moslems are willing to die because they think their faith is TRUE the apostles would be asked to die for what they thought was a lie.........
Israel was conquered by the Greeks. Greek culture and mythology influenced Jewish religion and culture as a result. This influence continued under Roman rule at the time of Christ
Paul needs a risen Jesus, bodily or otherwise, in order to have visions from him, and plant his seed of division between Jesus' Jewish followers and the pagan Romans, which he would lead. And that seed germinated here: "And finding some disciples, he said to them, 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?' So, they said to him, 'We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.' And he said to them, 'Into what then were you baptized?' So they said, 'Into John’s baptism.' Then Paul said, *** 'John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance (as did Jesus, AND his disciples), saying to the people that they should believe on Him (i.e. in his blood sacrifice) who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.' "***-Acts 19:1-4 Indeed, Jesus almost certainly cleansed the Temple, as John the Baptizer was likely planning, at least in part, to stop the idea of salvation through blood sacrifice, of any kind, and the corruption it had engendered, and to renew their emphasis on repentance.
I always thought the idea of "faith" in Christian sense was a non starter. Jesus followers and Paul didn't have "faith" they had experienced the resurrected Jesus. So it's not faith in Jesus but faith in men. Mystic, failed apocalyptic preachers with little to no education and no understanding of physics and such. These guys would put any modern kook to shame.
The biggest problem I see with your theory Dr. Tabor is that you are putting words in the mouths of unknown authors, and you don’t even know when the texts in question were written. The Gospel of John does not say “its not the tomb where we’re going to leave him”, or “it’s not our tomb, we don’t own this tomb, we are putting him there for the feast”. These are your own words. Leaving aside the authenticity question of John’s Gospel for the moment, the text simply states that Jesus was buried in an unused tomb in a garden near the place of crucifixion as the passover was fast approaching. The Gospel of John is not attempting to insinuate in any way, shape, or form that the burial was temporary. In fact John’s Gospel intends to attest to Jesus’ resurrection. The detail given in John likely mentions an unused tomb to simply align with the empty tomb story. An unused tomb before Jesus was placed in it equals an empty tomb after he has risen and the women arrive. So you are not only adding your own words to the text, you are basing a theory on something you don’t even know is an authentic part of the Jesus story. I’m not saying it isn’t, I’m simply pointing out that your theory would be akin to walking on water as it magically creates discussion that doesn’t exist. Consider the following example of how the Gospel was corrupted. Read Mark 9:1, both Matthew and Luke include this text. The implication of this text is that Jesus would only appear to some of the 12 following the crucifixion. Now read Mark 14:28. The text states that Jesus would appear to them in Galilee. Taken together, the two verses imply that Jesus would appear to some of the 12 in Galilee after the crucifixion. Matthew includes this second verse, but Luke doesn’t likely because of how Luke rewrote the story following the crucifixion, and it gives a good example of how the author of Luke attempted to align the text for agreement with the exception of one oversight. Luke 9:27! The author forgot that he included the bit about Jesus appearing to only some of the twelve. So how do we know which account to believe? Aside from the fact that Mark appears to be the source for both Matthew and Luke, we see that the account given in Mark agrees with the text from Peter, so we can therefore corroborate Marks account with another source. Now read 1 Cor. 15. We know Paul wasn’t one of the 12, so he wouldn’t have been present when Jesus said he would appear to some of the 12 in Galilee. Paul would have had to hear the account of this event by someone that was there. We know this is possible as he does meet with Peter and James, but keep in mind that many would agree 1 Corinthians appears to have been altered like in verse 14 for example. What if 1 Cor. 15:6-7 were also added to the original text? If you take verses 6 and 7 out of the text, then Paul’s account in 1 Cor 15 would essentially align with the account given in Mark. The main difference being Paul’s text reads as if Jesus appeared to the 12, but this could easily be explained as simply writing style, or the way Paul understood the story he heard. Could the same people responsible for the alterations seen in Matthew and Luke be responsible for other alterations like 1 Corinthians? The fact that 1 Cor. 15 aligns with other altered texts strongly suggests it as a possibility. And there are many other examples that demonstrate Matthew and Luke are not authentic accounts. Like the account of Jesus cursing the fig tree, Matthew butchers the text so bad that it makes the timeline of the event a physical impossibility.
THE "SHROUD" IS A WITNESS TO THE TORAH That corpse of the person imaged on the Shroud HAVING GONE UP/RESURRECTED is described in the TORAH, Genesis 49:8-10 as that of God's Son, YOU ARE GONE UP", to whom shall the gathering of the people be. Genesis 49:8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. 9 Judah is a lion's whelp: FROM THE PREY MY SON, YOU ART GONE UP: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The SEPTER shall not depart from Judah, nor A LAWGIVER from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. HE FULFILLS Zechariah 6:12-13, as the "counsel of peace" who bears the glory of the ruler and priest on the throne.
The Shroud of Turin debunks the Talbiot Jesus family Tomb. If the followers went into the tomb and got the shroud how is it possible that he was burried in another place. Jesus resurected!
The Shroud was likely removed when they cleansed & anointed His body before burial, as the women planned to do on Sunday morning. Do we have contemporaneous writing that gives the location where the Shroud was found? It could have been removed at the second burial site, and kept because of its unusual image.
@@7EV1N We don't know how they did the ritual of cleansing the body & anointing it like the women planned to do on Sunday. Because it didn't seem to make sense to do the ritual at night, it could have been done in daylight at the final burial site. Apparently, the only text that mentions the shroud are the gospels. We had an interesting discussion elsewhere in this comment section. The gentleman, @jeffreyerwin, had alot of good, additional information about the shroud, including physical evidence that it was removed by a mysterious, nonmechanical means from the body. We believe the shroud is definite proof of a transformation, and we do not have the technology on this planet to recreate the image. Please find the other area of shroud discussion in these comments. We think you will find it interesting, too...
Tabor ignores the fact that Friday and Saturday were holy days, thus handling dead bodies was not allowed. The women went to the tomb "before dawn" thus no opportunity for reburial. And the women would not have gone to the tomb without someone to remove the stone.
Some good ideas and insights but the focus on the personal body is misplaced. The body of Christ is his political body, his assembly, the church, which is the immortal resurrection body that the gates of hades cannot withstand. 1 Cor. 15 addresses the resurrection body from the issue of how are (present tense) the dead ones (plural) being raised (present tense). He says that they are being raised up in the spiritual body, the singular body with which the plural dead ones come. Stated another way, how are the dead ones of the old body of Israel being raised into the resurrection body of the New Covenant church? Paul say that denying that these dead ones are being raised from Israel constitutes the denial of Christ’s resurrection and the denial of the gospel and the denial of their own resurrection from sin-death. Their faith is futile and they are still in their sins if Christ has not been raised, which he hasn’t if the dead ones of the old body aren’t being then raised. The dead ones of Israel were being raised into the communion of the saints not by the rising of the flesh and blood body of old Israel. That old body was being sown and dying in the ground, so that the new body could rise up as a shoot, a tender plant that would grow up to become the large tree in which the birds of the air nested and the world would find shade and good fruits, the healing of the nations. This is not about the physical restoration of physical life after physical death. Christ was the anointed one, the authorised ruler, the manifestation of the power and authority of God in the form of a man. Yet before his incarnation YHWH was the cloud, the pillar of fire by night and the column of smoke by day leading the old body out of bondage. This Christ was invisible and non-human, represented by prophets and priests. This cloud form of YHWH is what they saw at the transfiguration and the form that he had when he rose, the cloud in which the great cloud of witnesses belong also. That cloud form was the invisible God Kimg, ruling and leading without a human form, without physical flesh. Yet he appears in human form from time to time as the Angel of YHWH. This is the form that the Lord ascended to become: invisible and hidden by the cloud because he became that cloud. In that form he promised to return to destroy the old body, the Second Temple, destroying that old creation and its political body. That old body would become the corpse which would attract the vultures. He would come “with his mighty angels” I.e. not personally but by means of the might angels, the agent of wrath to repay the rebels (Rom. 13:2-4). Those might angels came as the legions to dispatch the corpse, just as and when the Lord formally promised. He would do the work of judgment that the Father had given to his hand. By this would his enemies know that he was resurrected and enthroned and crushing them under his feet. The post resurrection appearances of the Lord in human form are no different from the Old Testament appearances of YHWH in human form to give revelation, to perform signs and to teach. They are also no different from his human appearances as a man during his teaching ministry.
lol. Paul was a mystic, like Yeshu, like Cephas, like the author of the third later of John. If one was a demon possessed they all were. Was Jesus false prophecy any more true than Paul’s.
@@Darisiabgal7573 I didn't say he was demon possessed, I said Paul admitted in his own writings that he was possessed by an Angel of Satan Paul did not teach what Jesus or the apostles taught he caught his own Gospel
I guess you could call it getting them from Satan, but more likely he just made them up himself (same difference I guess), using Mithraism as a model, like for the "Lord's Supper". And I further believe Paul was the Beast of Revelation, he being a wealthy, born Roman citizen as a result of his Herodian heritage. The number of the Beast is not the anachronistic Arabic numerals, 666, but the Hebrew characters for six-hundred, sixty and six, which through Jewish Gematria decodes to Tarsus, a wealthy city at the time and the Roman center for the pagan mystical cult of Mithraism.
@@onejohn2.26. The agents of God or Satan all stem from the Divine councils of Canaan and Babylon. The first biblicals deamons were the Beliel in Jewish tradition the wicked, whose names reek of the Palmyran Bel gods, the word literally means the wicked one. The angles of Satan are the fallen ones in Christian literature. But Satan wasn’t a name god, he was the adversary, the interrogator, in the story of Job. The story of Job was just a story, it’s part of the Jewish wisdom LITERATURE you take value away from it and impart different meaning when you consider Satan to be a named god. You can find a list of named gods here on Wikipedia. List of Deities at Canaanite Religion At least two of El’s angels were angels in the Canaanite Pantheon If you examine this list closely you will find several gods of Israel Anat (Beth Anath, Shamgar of Anath - Judges, Anathoth - Isaiah, wife of YHWH - Egypt, originally Mesopotamian), Athirath (Asherah - Luz (Bethel), the 🕎 - Luz, wife of ‘El - the most high, wife of Yahweh in Edom and 9th century BCE Yehudah), Ba’al Hermon (the god of Mt. Hermon), Astarte (Ishtar), Hadad (“Ba’al” - high god in Canaanite pantheon before Mesopotamian conquest, after which El became high god, son of Dagan), Bel (like Ba’al chief god of the Palmyrans), Gad (tribe of Israel and god of the foothills of mt. Hermon), Hauron (Beth Hauran, Israel - the gateway to the underworld, the passage from the coast to the hill, a pair of settlements), Yam (Psalms , the sea god), Mot (many books, death), Qos (many texts, the Edomite name for Yahweh, originally a SW Arabian/Edomite god), Shapash (female version of Shamesh and possibly the original version at Beth Shamesh), Yarikh (Moon god, a powerful god of Jericho before the UR III conquests), Shalim (Dusk, Peace, Underworld - Salem, foundation of Shalim, Urushalim, Jerusalem) and Shahan (Dawn, a lost city in Jordan) [these two gods are the bastard sons of El that were adopted and raised by Asherah. List of Mesopotamian deities If you examine this list closely you will find several gods of Israel Ishtar (Ester, Ester, Astarte), Dumuzid (Tammuz, Ezekiel), Shamesh (Beth Shamesh), Ea (Ia, Yahu, - Judges), An-Enlil (‘El - the most high), Iskur (Hadad “Ba’al”), Dagan (Judges), Anat see above generally considered a Canaanite goddess, originally from Anah, Iraq) Demons and primordial gods - Lilitu (Lilith in the Isaiah, night demons), Wife of Absu (Tiamat - Enuma Elis: Tahom - Genesis 1), Absu (Waters beneath the earth - Genesis), Nammu (The goddess who at the instruction of Ea-Yahu made men from clay - Nammu in the Eridu tradition is considered the first goddess and mother of all the other gods), kullulu (Fish man -euhemerized into Abkallu and Jonah), Lahmu (Lahmi - the guardian of Ea -Yahu, the Apotraic figure for which Beth-Lahmi (Bethlehem) was named), Usumgallu (Glistening one, serpent, garden of Eden) What is to be understood here is that angelology and demonology did not spring into existence. The gods as you understand them begin with Absu (Swamp - Eridu - the oldest temple E-Absu - foundations are 7000 years old) and the associated sea “thm”. Both are found in Genesis. The next layer of gods are the Early sentient gods. We cannot be certain which sentient god came first, I tend to think Nammu, then Enki and Enlil followed by Anu (Erech). Anu’s priest gave celestial authority to the priesthoods of coalition cities and Innana, the mistress of heaven (Uruk) gave authority to kings via Akitu ceremony, a predecessor of Anointment. During the colonization phase Sumer runs into problems at Shuruppak (the city of the great flood, Genesis) and two major stories come forth, parts of both stories are in Genesis. Then is the Early dynastic period and the expansion of the Marian kings. This is followed by the Dynastic period, Akkad, UR III (possibly the origin of the Abrahamic colonization story in Genesis), Isin Larsa, and Babylon (probably the origin of some conquest stories in Joshua). During this period the sages of Enki either split off or were sent westward for spiritual reasons, some legendary seven, the Apkallu, returned. One so named Oannes is a pretext for the story of Jonah (Ioannes). During the Dynastic period the Canaanite gods emerge from the substrate prehistoric religion. The system was initially organized around Ebla, whose high god was Ishara, a goddess of prosperity, at this time Hadad was a god of the North. The Eblaites were the first literate Canaanite peoples, and they kept tabs on the other gods, noting that Enki/Ea was often referred to as Ia (Yah-phonecian alephbeth) in parts of Canaan. Given the correspondence with the sages we can speculate that Beth Lahmi in the middle and late Bronze Age was one of their settlements, though I think they moved to the SSE during the LBAC. During the late Bronze Age many gods just disappeared, their cities destroyed, Israel, an extrajudicial entity during the LBAC became a collective polity during the early Iron Age, At the time it was thoroughly polytheistic with its leaders also polytheistic, its in the Bible itself, the thin veil placed over these legendary figures has been unveiled by archaeological studies from Israel and Mesopotamia and the text has been recontextualized. The mosaic foundational narrative has been shown to be largely myth. There was no Exodus because Egypt occupied Canaan until 1120 BCE when they left. YH was probably a god in Israel during the Early and Middle Iron Age in the territory of Yehudah, still under the auspices of the priesthood of ‘El. During the 9th or 10th century BCE Yahweh, who had been a southwest/west Arabian god made its way into Samaria. Israel Finkelstein speculates that Ahab’s son Nimshi was the first to honor the god. The first inscriptions to YHWH come from Edom and Judah and are late ninth century. They indicate that YHWH is a Samaritan/Edomite/South Arabian god. The period that follows in Yehudah is the pruning of gods until major sages like Isaiah make the proclamation that the other gods are dead to them, for they have done nothing for the people of YHWH. As stated angels of gods existed prior to this, there were two angels of El that were also biblical. By the time of Nehemiah El had been Absorbed into Yahwism, he appears to have destroyed the relics of El and Asherah in the temple, including the Ark of the Covenent. During the reign of Yosiah, the relics to these gods and other gods were destroyed within and outside Yehudah. This however backfired as this was a signal to the surrounding dynasties that Jerusalem was trying to play a different game. Egypt clamped it down under Necho II and Babylon ended it. Now the Yahwist were surrounded, completely immersed in Mesopotamian culture and their gods for a period of about 2 generations. At the end of the period they are sent back to reconcile their god with all these fantastic stories, in particularly those of Enki, that sounded a lot like an older version of their god, Yahu, one they had completely merged into YHWH. And so now they needed to refactor the gods. So instead of having two adopted angels of El, they have many, taking on the powers of certain gods. What to do with all these Bel? Euhemerize them as wicked kings like Nimrod (Nimrud was a capital of Assyria) and other things. They avoid using the Semetic words for sun and moon to avoid confusion with the gods as they rewrite all the stories. The old gods of great kings become the Nephilim, and like the some Mesopotamian gods they are bound to the underworld (Kur) in chains. It literally means they are bound inside the mountain. Instead of the great king surviving the flood and starting a new age of Kish, the old kingdoms are destroyed with their gods . . .but the gods were not killed, they are all over Israel. And so we have a problem, they are the gods of the wicked one, the Beliel . . .the devils. This weak notion in Judaism is strengthened by Egyptian and Greek mythology to create the modern notion of Angels and Demons, both originally of the form Daemones, various tendencies of humans. If you read the book of John, know one thing, it was not written for the orthodoxy. It was a protognostic text that appeared 100 years before protorthodoxy. iraneaus found it in a collection of gnostic texts. It was not meant for everyone to understand, but a select few, its words are metaphors, these are magical notions to the Christian mystics of the first century. It is like a chant in Hinduism or Buddhism. Its sayings are repetitious because it was meant to be repeated in meditation. Its was the Greco-Roman answer to mysticism in Christianity after all hope of the coming kingdom on earth was lost and the Jerusalem sect was scattered to the four winds. The goal of the mystic was to find the temple in the mystical realm. The reality of John is not a historical reality but a spiritual doorway, don’t seek history in the text, you will be disappointed. And the doorway, it’s a pathway to delusion without reflection. Take the advice of Rabbi Akira and avoid heaven diving.
@@onejohn2.26. None the less the teaching by John the Immerser and Jesus was false. They did not need to repent, then end was not nigh, the kingdom of heaven did not come, and it still hasn’t come.
Saul whom you like to quote comes later after the events of the crucifiction. And therefore he cannot be a reliable witness and the views are his and his alone. When there is smoke there is fire as they say. There was sighting of Jesus in flesh and bones. That should not be discounted like you prefer to do. You have to explain that and not wave it away in preference to the views of Saul. Jesus did not die and he appeared to some people. Jesus when he appeared to them was not a spirit. Easy explanation. There is no need for resurrection and no conspiracy theories.
Dead for 3 days in a sealed tomb guarded by Roman centurion. Then seen alive but able to pass through walls... seen rising into the clouds, had to pass through the firmament ... A resurrected or 'glorified' body, though still physical, vibrates at a different frequency.
You seem to be reading a lot into the text, without justification (at least from a textual view). Simply because Joseph's new tomb was convenient for burial doesnt then mean his body was subsequently moved. The women knew full well where Joseph and Nicodemus had taken his body, hence why they could visit that tomb on the Sunday morning. Do you really think Joseph or Nicodemus wouldnt have bothered to tell anyone, particularly the women who had stayed for hours at the cross witnessing the death of Jesus, that they had moved his body in the mean time? It appears the only reason youre reading your theory of a second tomb into the text is because you dont believe Jesus' body was physically resurrected (I cant think of any other reason). The text itself doesnt even hint at such a scenario of a temporary burial.
The ultimate tomb in Talpiot, read Arimathea, was Joseph's, and was new, but the one nearby to the crucifixion wasn't necessarily Joseph of Arimathea's.
@@derekallen4568 that is based on the assumption that either God doesnt exist, or if he does he is unable to raise the dead or chooses never to do so. It is also based on the assumption that Jesus is just another human being, like you and me (Im assuming youre not AI!)
@@PC-vg8vn if you doing engineering or medicine you can't assume the supernatural. If you design a building you don't assume a supernatural being is going to keep it up. The same with medicine or history. If the tomb is empty you can't presuppose it was a resurrection. That's the last assumption you make.
I’m so surprised how off the mark you are since you’ve studied this stuff all your life and have been to Isreal many times and studied archeological sites. Everyone believes they know the historical location of the crucifixion. It’s a place called Golgotha which translates to something like “the place of the skull”. The location literally had a cave shaped like a skull for thousands of years and only in the last 15 years did the skull like resemblance fall apart. It’s right near where the gate was so geographically it lines up with what the Bible describes. Historically it lines up with Roman behavior to put crucifixions on the main paths leading to the gate. There are local people who would tell archeologists that their grandfathers told them that this is where Christ was crucified. So it’s like pretty well established. The tomb is literally a stones throw away. It is not on the mount of olives as you say. It is in a plot of land that had wine production and grape growing. There’s a channel for a huge round stone to be rolled in front just as the Bible describes. And no one ever found the stone which is in alignment with the teaching of the Bible. Jews never buried anyone the way we do it in the us or in other European countries. They would lay the body in a cave with open cut out windows and they would leave it in there for a long time and the bugs and bacteria and critters would eat all the flesh from the bodies. Then after a designated amount of time they would go back, collect the bones and put them in a bone box and their bones would then go into a family cave with the bones of their ancestors. The Bible specifically said that Jesus was put in a toumb that had never been used before so of coarse there wouldn’t be any bodies or bones of anyone else. Also this is how Lazarus was resurrected by Jesus after he was placed in his tomb/cave. The resurrection is like the fundamental precept of the Christian narrative. God came to earth in human form to die on the cross for All sin part, present and future and he defeated death and went to heaven to return again in the end times. Anybody that makes claims against this simply doesn’t understand the Bible and you’re playing mental gymnastics when the historical evidence overwhelmingly supports the Bible.
The important fact, often overlooked, is that Jesus' tomb was NOT found empty! His bloody burial shroud and his post-crucifixion face cloth were both found in the tomb. That is not an empty tomb, and that fact is very important because the presence of those bloody cloths proves that Jesus' corpse was not stolen or otherwise removed by being carried away. Any group of men or disciples attempting to carry away the corpse would certainly have left it in its shroud. There was absolutely no point of or necessity to the removal of three pounds of essential cloth from a 170 pound corpse. That burial shroud is still in existence today and has been carefully examined. It shows the images of a human body that has been executed by crucifixion exactly as is described in the Gospels. Furthermore, that dead body appears to have been removed from its shroud by a mysterious non-mechanical means as none of the cloth's threads are torn and none of the blood marks disturbed. That suggests that the corpse in question dematerialized. Pehaps a little more attention ought to be paid by our archaeologist to archaelology in his attempts to understand scripture.
First off, the Shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery. Proven. Not even the style of shrouds really used. And of course those who removed his body removed the bloody temporary shroud and discarded it.
ad-hoc explanations that have never been confirmed. Jesus might as well have been teleported by aliens, and this explanation still fits the evidence and is as unproven as the other supernatural explanations.
@@rickshannon2044 I kind of find it difficult that any Jew would preserve a blood-stained shroud, as it would likely be ritually unclean. you know, Jews have something against touching blood.
They can't even date it, or show how it was created, with any certainty. But whether it was from Jesus or not, it doesn't change the narrative James Tabor is offering here, and which I think is correct.
It's definitely not a hoax. We don't have the technology to recreate the image. The plant microscopic evidence, what csi calls "hair & fiber" places it in the geographical area. The headpiece is a perfect match that was located elsewhere, Spain?, since the 4th or 5th century. Please go to Dr. Tabor's website & read his writings on the Shroud.
@@mahlonmarr856 I get that but, it needs to follow the critical steps. Like why would the burial party wrap Jesus in the shroud and then unwrap him to take him to the second burial place to once again wrap him in his final state of decay?
@@silvermoontearoom7123 I get you but and I have read tabors breakdown on his discovery of the tomb of the shroud. My issue is trying to figure out why would the burial party wrap Jesus in the shroud, then unwrap him and leave the shroud behind when transporting the body to the final burial tomb. Dr. Tabor has only brefielfy mentioned it, but not a full on detailed look into what really went down. I would especially love to hear what he has to say about the shroud of turin as he is a expert in studying later Christian medieval practices in that period of time.
@@7EV1Nany number of reasons, the easiest being, they just wanted a fresh shroud instead of a gory bloody one. Another could be so they'd be less likely to draw any attention. And they didn't have hearses then, so moving shrouded, bodies around wouldn't have been unusual, unless the shrouds were bloody.
I really enjoy the objective views that you give on your own hypothesis. Dr. Tabor proposes questions that even a skeptic would fail to ask. I'm sure your channel will keep on growing. Thanks for all the hard work.😊
As ever, puts so much in context; thank you once again.Thought-provoking but so clearly explained and ultimately most comforting - death is not the end;
My question: when the women found that the tomb was empty, and when they reported that to others, why did no one ask Joseph of Arimathea, the man who had put Jesus in that tomb?
I'm sure they did, eventually, it was a very chaotic time.
I want to say " hindsight is 20/20" 🤷♂️ lol 👍 😊 ❤️
It could be that they did, but the conversation wasn't interesting enough to make it into the stories.
That would make too much sense.
the more interesting question is why were they at the tomb with herbs and spices.......... jesus had already been buried......... if they went to the tomb to pay respects, they would ve gone with a garland of flowers as they surely werre expecting to stand outside the tomb like you would do in any graveyard..........
Dr Tabor, I’ve bought a few of your books and studied some of your recommended reading list. It has been invaluable to me in sorting some of the problems I’ve had with the church in my adult life. Thank you. Edit for spelling
Thanks, Dr. Tabor. Really appreciate your understanding of Paul.
Dr. Tabor you really really need based on this great video series write a huge big book where your view of the Jesus death and burial timeline would be presented in great detail and with timelines and schematics and locations and maps (and also employing a zoom-in structure as the book proceeds so that the reader can follow reiterated and ever more detailed and precise formulations with more ease and that way slowly get a more nuanced view) and in which all the other opinions/objections by your colleagues would be addressed
I think Dr Tabor really was there in a past life ❤️ I really want to believe that Dr Tabor.😊😊
As a professional mortician, I can say with 100% certainty, a putrefying corpse will NOT come back.
🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 whole reason why this event is so amazing/unbelievable 🤷♀️ ❤️
@@lindabishop1402yes ! Our resident mortician confirms it was a miracle !!!😂
Imagine one comes back and the family demands refund
Totally inspired. Thank you
My body is a vessel that I keep fit to house my Father in
Yet the New Testament gospels were written at the earliest almost a century after Jesus lived. In simple terms, the New Testament narrative of Jesus was not written by any eyewitness or anyone that ever knew him.
Few scholars believe any of the Gospels were written 120-130 years after Jesus, so I dont know where you got that from. Most scholars date Mark to the 60s or early 70s, so even if you take that dating that's 30-40 years after. Personally I think there is no reason why Mark could not have been written in the 50s. Even John, which many think was the last one to be written, was likely written in the 80s or 90s at the latest, that's 50-60 years later. Very few scholars think any of the Gospels were written in the 2nd century, particularly as we have 2nd century church fathers referring to the Gospel writings, such as Papias.
You should read Richard Bauckham's book 'Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'. He's not a typical evangelical Christian writer, some would view him as 'liberal', but he is adamant the Gospels were written based on eyewitness testimony. Id recommend the 2nd ed.
The gospel of John written by the apostle John is certainly an eye witness account.
The most recent scholarship dates John around 120 CE
@@iCupTV247 not that Im aware of.
@@PC-vg8vn Now you are aware
Dr. Tabor, was Jesus buried twice and the second tomb was found empty or was the 1st tomb found empty because the body of Jesus had been moved to the second tomb? Thank you.
Oh wow, Jesus was like everyone else and just died and never came back. Hey, let's start a world religion!
L. Ron Hubbard has joined the chat...........
This is from out of left field, but there's a book I read many years ago called Dai Sho by Marc Olden, and I'm sure there's a reference in the book to a Japanese Buddhist belief about a small bone from the neck looked for after the body is cremated.
The reference was to one such bone left over from the cremation of a samurai, the ugly shape of which indicated he would suffer in his next incarnation, and I did wonder where this belief originated.
Wow 👏 👌 that's really interesting
Doctor Tabor, do you think it's plausible that the Passover happened on the weekly sabbath? That coincincidence did actually happened on the years 30 and 33. That would account for the tradition of crucifixion on a Friday morning, but leaves Jesus dead before the Passover, and therefore the last supper would not be a Passover Meal.
This is all very fascinating but if there really was an "empty" tomb the apologetics would be quite developed within a few days or weeks - certainly by the time Paul is writing - and yet it seems obvious that the gospels according to Matthew, Luke, John, Peter are responding to questions that arose in response to Mark's account.
Not only back to dust but God out of stone could raise up children for Abraham.
Interesting theory. I wonder why Joseph of Arimathea and the people in his party didn't tell any of the women present at Jesus's crucifixion and death that they'd be coming by early to re-bury Jesus's body in a nicer tomb (or, at least, why the writer of the Gospel of Mark didn't bother to include such a crucial bit of information): "Hey folks, no need to panic about Jesus's missing corpse! It was all just a somewhat confused, extended burial process due to Shabbos and Passover happening back-to-back. After Shabbos was over, we simply returned to Jesus's temporary tomb under cover of darkness to transport the corpse to a nicer tomb and, for whatever reason, we completely failed to tell Jesus's mourning family members and closest followers that this is what we were going to do with their loved one's corpse."
That aside, do you think the writer of the Gospel According to St. Mark interpreted his own empty tomb narrative in the same way Dr. Tabor interprets it?
Joseph of Arimathea wouldn't have had time. He had to get permission from (read bribe) Pilate to bury the body temporarily, organize transportation that wouldn't draw any attention, going at night from Talpiot (Arimathea?) and back. And he could have left a young man to inform the mourners of what he was doing--which message and follow on could well have been edited.
Pilate would have insisted it be done at night so as not to make it appear that the body of a crucified traitor was being honored. And since Pilate was in on it, it makes the story about the sleeping Roman guards to be the fiction it probably was, being only told in Matthew.
@@mahlonmarr856 Doesn't explain why the burial party left the bloody burial shroud behind in the original tomb.
First Mark started his gospel with Mk 16:1-8 pageflip, then you would read Mk 1:1
Thus you would already observe the mirror parallels, and the three women were not latecomers to the story, but overshadow the story.
So Mark uses the tomb as advertisement on page 1 of his quier of 5 folios and 20 pages. And the story answers the question what the women were afraid about (Mark drives Isis cultists into panick mode here).
Of course in hindsight you would flop page 20 again a read in a circular fashion (galilee = circle, 12 instances in Mark).
So there is a clash between the straight way and the circular way.
Mark does idolize vanity which was just the flavour of the day. He does so by Nazareth too (it sits on a co-latitude of exactly 1 radians = universal ambition/hell). He also aludes to the Odysee which is another idolized vanity. Mark the deconvert is telling you his vanity adventure. You can decode all the reasons to his deconversion, as his story portrays more the conflicts of the church than Jesus.
So what did Mark believe? Mark turned naturalist cynic. He gives one good example about what crossed his desk: Archimedes calculation of the number pi. It is encoded in the riddle of the one loaf using large and small baskets. The solutions are 22 and 7.
Mark keeps his beliefs to himself but has one single outcoming when he adresses the scribes and copyists in the parable of the sower. And you can more than read his anti-authoritarian mindset, which creates Jesus in opposition to him as scribe.
Yet Mark still does not advocate general literacy, which lets Mark run into his great paradox: the genius composer who depends on slave copyists yet appeals to an anti-authoritarian life.
Concerning the resurrection Mark is an agnosticist.
@@mahlonmarr856 and with a little bit more imagination you could probably describe what he ate for lunch the day before, or what he gave as a gift at the birthday party he was invited to the following week. Your whole story-line breaks at the seams in more than one place, but the part about Pilate insisting the body be moved at night is particularly troubling because an unexplained empty tomb story would be counterproductive to the Jewish order that had him crucified. Since Pilate's interests would have been more centered on keeping the pesky Jewish unrest under control, purposefully orchestrating a narrative that made it look like Jesus rose from the dead when he was really being reburied elsewhere seems far fetched to say the least. And then I suppose your going to suggest that Joseph of A. secretly buried all the other people there without them knowing about it too?
None of the Gospels support Dr. Tabor's theory. Part of the problem is that the Gospels have been corrupted, and it leaves the door wide open to all sorts of speculation. Instead of counting the number of donkey's written into a forged Gospel, scholarship would be better spent if it at least tried to separate truth from fiction IMO.
I think a big clue is Jesus was not in "his tomb" but a temporary tomb.
The great awakening by mikki Willis
Jesus' body would not have been left on the cross to rot as many seem to think. The Romans, during peace time, showed respect to the Jewish rituals and customs, including that a body must be buried before Sabbath. It was only during their war with the Jews 40 years later (which Jesus predicted) that the Romans left their bodies on the many thousands of crosses. So it was more likely than not that Jesus' body was buried, just as Paul said, in agreement with the Gospels.
Absolutely not true😂😂😂 they didn't care about them and had mass graves. Paul also has no empty tomb and no blood and flesh resurrection
@@leom6343 provide evidence that Jews crucified by the Romans during the 30s (ie peacetime) were either left to rot on their cross or were buried in mass graves, even where the family or Jewish authorities requested the body for burial.
Source?
@@elainafaust3717 he is just making stuff up.🤣
@@elainafaust3717 search Craig Evans Jewish Burial Traditions
They don’t have a single bone from the 12 holy tribes, profits, holy men and women and so on. They never knew who they were otherwise they would’ve destroyed their graves.
Don’t ever forget what Jesus said about the priest at the temple and who wrote your New Testament
Death/Resurrection is part of the Fruit of Good/Evil, Day/Night, so on and so forth, the DUALITY of life that acts as a CHECK AND BALANCE and also Freedon of Choice, without it bad cannot be contained nor good have a hope...wait, am I becoming philosophical?.....
Who in that group had the authority or the audacity to go to Pilot and ask for favors for this rebel he had just had executed?
Joseph of Arimathea was exceedingly wealthy and was on the Sanhedrin, and most likely bribed Pilate, who would have insisted that Joseph move the body undercover of night. Joseph could even have been a Roman citizen, either by purchase, or by Herodian birthright, like Paul.
@@mahlonmarr856 Thanks 👍 _!_
James what i ommited i did not say how big the igloo was firmament
Rabbi Singer points to a glaring plot hole throughout the evolution of the resurrection myth
Why would women let the body rot for three days and THEN apply unguents?
That's not what was done. Within hours of death, they applied unguents and then buried the body. Male christian Greek writers from other cultures may not have known that.
The application of "unguents" was delayed by the Sabbath. The women's return was at first light after the Sabbath and less than 40 hours after the burial.
FYI, because the Sabbath began at sunset on Friday, the no one had time to complete the burial process.
There's no way anyone moved the Body when the tomb was sealed and guarded by Roman centurions.
It's amazing the stories people will come up with in order to not believe.
2 Thes 2 warning!
YES, That corpse of the person imaged on the Shroud HAVING GONE UP/RESURRECTED is described in the TORAH, Genesis 49:8-10 as that of God's Son, YOU ARE GONE UP", to whom shall the gathering of the people be.
Genesis 49:8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. 9 Judah is a lion's whelp: FROM THE PREY MY SON, YOU ART GONE UP: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The SEPTER shall not depart from Judah, nor A LAWGIVER from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
HE FULFILLS Zechariah 6:12-13, as the "counsel of peace" who bears the glory of the ruler and priest on the throne.
Nowhere near as fantastic as those invented to get people to believe--4000 years and counting. God supposedly parted the Red Sea, and then 3 weeks later they were worshipping a golden calf in the very presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire that had saved them.
and no Roman centurions would have allowed any of Jesus's followers to get near the tomb either...and they weren't have ran away frightened either...because they would have executed by the governor if they had...
the gospel goes on to report that the centurions ran back to the priests and told them the story about Jesus...well the writer of Matthew would not have been able to know what if anything the centurions told the priests...for the writer wouldn't have been allowed in the priest's presence...nor would any follower of Jesus have dared to follow the guards...because the temple priest's guards would have arrested them before they got near the priests.
and the women at the tomb ran back to tell the disciples about the tomb incident...as the Roman guards were going to tell the priests...so who followed the guards to find out what they told the priests?....
Mark does not say that Jesus has risen to the heaven, but that he has ben rasied in the same way you would raise a corpse.
Btw Mark started with 16:1-8 on page one of his 20 page quire. Thus you would get an idea about Isis cult gone wrong or something like that as an introduction and the story then acts as an explanation why the 3 women were frightened about.
There were 3 sacred languages:
Hebrew, Sanskrit and Ancient Aramaic.
In English we are speaking Hebrew backwards.
There is no E F I J O V W in Abri 'Hebrew'.
These sounds are achieved by adding so-called 'vowel points' (various dots and dashes) to the 'Hebrew' letters.
Name Jesus has been used to replace REAL name Yahusha. (There was no J in Hebrew at that time).
Yahu, Yahuah or shorter version YAH, sometimes used YHVH (not really correct according to 'Hebrew') - Real God's name
Yahusha - Yahu Sha - Means Yah Saves / Yahu Saves (It's real name of 'Jesus').
Sha in 'Hebrew' comes from the root word yasha - it means salvation, deliverer, rescue.
Yahuah - Our Creator
Yahu is Savior
Yahuah is Salvation
Yahweh / Yahveh - false pagan god.
Yahushua - is NOT God's name - it means 'Oh Yah I cry out'
LORD - in Hebrew is Baal (Ba'al)
Yahudah - Judah - Jew
Messiah name is NOT Yeshua / Yashua
Messiah name is Yahusha.
Yahw - There are no names in scripture
Yahu - There are 72 names in scripture
Joshua -> YAHUshua = "YAHUAH is Salvation"
Samuel -> ShamAHuel = "Listen to YAHUAH your Eloah"
Isaiah -> YeshaYAHU = "Salvation is YAHUAH"
Jeremiah -> YirmeYAHU "Resurrection/Rising is YAHUAH"
Ezekiel -> YAHchezqel = "YAHUAH is a Righteous Eloah"
Daniel -> DaniYAHel = "The decision is YAHUAH's our Eloah"
Hosea -> HosheAH = "The Deliver is YAHUAH"
Joel -> YAHel = "YAHUAH is Eloah"
Amos -> AHmoce = "YAHUAH's Burden"
Obadiah -> ObadYAHU = "The Servant of YAHUAH"
Jonah -> YonAH = "YAHUAH provides Warmth
Micah -> MiykahYAHU = "Who is like YAHUAH"
Nahum -> NachUm = "Comfort comes from YAHUAH"
Habakkuk -> ChabaqUq = "Embrace YAHUAH"
Zephaniah- -> TsphanYAHU = "The Secret is YAHUAH"
Haggai -> ChaggaYAH = "The Celebration is YAHUAH"
Zechariah -> ZacharYAHU = "YAHUAH Remembers”
Malachi -> MalakiYAH = “Messenger of YAHUAH"
Job -> YAHshub = "YAHUAH Will Return”
Ezra -> EzrAH = “Our Help is YAHUAH"
Nehemiah -> NechemYAH = "Consoled by YAHUAH"
Matthew -> MattithYAHU = "The gift is YAHUAH"
If Jesus of Nazareth's body was in a tomb, why is there no record of the Jews arguing that he was not resurrected, because his body was known to be in a tomb?
And why would the apostles be willing to die for what they knew to be a lie?
@@Gleeb1776why Muslims are willing to die for their faith!!!
Did they spread the words that he is risen or they were scared and talked to anybody.
@@hanygeorge8603 false equivalence,
moslems are willing to die because they think their faith is TRUE
the apostles would be asked to die for what they thought was a lie.........
Did the Grreeks bring all the mythical text to the bible? How and for what purpose is religion and government intertwined?
Israel was conquered by the Greeks. Greek culture and mythology influenced Jewish religion and culture as a result. This influence continued under Roman rule at the time of Christ
Reserection of jesus. To be reborn as a human being covers birthdays.
Paul needs a risen Jesus, bodily or otherwise, in order to have visions from him, and plant his seed of division between Jesus' Jewish followers and the pagan Romans, which he would lead. And that seed germinated here:
"And finding some disciples, he said to them, 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?' So, they said to him, 'We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.'
And he said to them, 'Into what then were you baptized?' So they said, 'Into John’s baptism.' Then Paul said, *** 'John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance (as did Jesus, AND his disciples), saying to the people that they should believe on Him (i.e. in his blood sacrifice) who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.' "***-Acts 19:1-4
Indeed, Jesus almost certainly cleansed the Temple, as John the Baptizer was likely planning, at least in part, to stop the idea of salvation through blood sacrifice, of any kind, and the corruption it had engendered, and to renew their emphasis on repentance.
Did any of you understand the significance of the napkin??? It was covered His face.
see: Sudarium of Oviedo
🤗❤️
I always thought the idea of "faith" in Christian sense was a non starter. Jesus followers and Paul didn't have "faith" they had experienced the resurrected Jesus. So it's not faith in Jesus but faith in men. Mystic, failed apocalyptic preachers with little to no education and no understanding of physics and such. These guys would put any modern kook to shame.
The biggest problem I see with your theory Dr. Tabor is that you are putting words in the mouths of unknown authors, and you don’t even know when the texts in question were written. The Gospel of John does not say “its not the tomb where we’re going to leave him”, or “it’s not our tomb, we don’t own this tomb, we are putting him there for the feast”. These are your own words. Leaving aside the authenticity question of John’s Gospel for the moment, the text simply states that Jesus was buried in an unused tomb in a garden near the place of crucifixion as the passover was fast approaching.
The Gospel of John is not attempting to insinuate in any way, shape, or form that the burial was temporary. In fact John’s Gospel intends to attest to Jesus’ resurrection. The detail given in John likely mentions an unused tomb to simply align with the empty tomb story. An unused tomb before Jesus was placed in it equals an empty tomb after he has risen and the women arrive.
So you are not only adding your own words to the text, you are basing a theory on something you don’t even know is an authentic part of the Jesus story. I’m not saying it isn’t, I’m simply pointing out that your theory would be akin to walking on water as it magically creates discussion that doesn’t exist.
Consider the following example of how the Gospel was corrupted. Read Mark 9:1, both Matthew and Luke include this text. The implication of this text is that Jesus would only appear to some of the 12 following the crucifixion. Now read Mark 14:28. The text states that Jesus would appear to them in Galilee. Taken together, the two verses imply that Jesus would appear to some of the 12 in Galilee after the crucifixion. Matthew includes this second verse, but Luke doesn’t likely because of how Luke rewrote the story following the crucifixion, and it gives a good example of how the author of Luke attempted to align the text for agreement with the exception of one oversight. Luke 9:27! The author forgot that he included the bit about Jesus appearing to only some of the twelve.
So how do we know which account to believe? Aside from the fact that Mark appears to be the source for both Matthew and Luke, we see that the account given in Mark agrees with the text from Peter, so we can therefore corroborate Marks account with another source. Now read 1 Cor. 15. We know Paul wasn’t one of the 12, so he wouldn’t have been present when Jesus said he would appear to some of the 12 in Galilee. Paul would have had to hear the account of this event by someone that was there. We know this is possible as he does meet with Peter and James, but keep in mind that many would agree 1 Corinthians appears to have been altered like in verse 14 for example.
What if 1 Cor. 15:6-7 were also added to the original text? If you take verses 6 and 7 out of the text, then Paul’s account in 1 Cor 15 would essentially align with the account given in Mark. The main difference being Paul’s text reads as if Jesus appeared to the 12, but this could easily be explained as simply writing style, or the way Paul understood the story he heard.
Could the same people responsible for the alterations seen in Matthew and Luke be responsible for other alterations like 1 Corinthians? The fact that 1 Cor. 15 aligns with other altered texts strongly suggests it as a possibility. And there are many other examples that demonstrate Matthew and Luke are not authentic accounts. Like the account of Jesus cursing the fig tree, Matthew butchers the text so bad that it makes the timeline of the event a physical impossibility.
James why do i dream of an alien invasion pluss what looks like big oblong flying aloft. I was asleep dreaming.
THE "SHROUD" IS A WITNESS TO THE TORAH
That corpse of the person imaged on the Shroud HAVING GONE UP/RESURRECTED is described in the TORAH, Genesis 49:8-10 as that of God's Son, YOU ARE GONE UP", to whom shall the gathering of the people be.
Genesis 49:8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. 9 Judah is a lion's whelp: FROM THE PREY MY SON, YOU ART GONE UP: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? 10 The SEPTER shall not depart from Judah, nor A LAWGIVER from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
HE FULFILLS Zechariah 6:12-13, as the "counsel of peace" who bears the glory of the ruler and priest on the throne.
The Shroud of Turin debunks the Talbiot Jesus family Tomb. If the followers went into the tomb and got the shroud how is it possible that he was burried in another place. Jesus resurected!
The Shroud was likely removed when they cleansed & anointed His body before burial, as the women planned to do on Sunday morning.
Do we have contemporaneous writing that gives the location where the Shroud was found? It could have been removed at the second burial site, and kept because of its unusual image.
@@silvermoontearoom7123 Why would the remove the shroud and move the body just to then rewrap him again for the final preparation?
@@7EV1N We don't know how they did the ritual of cleansing the body & anointing it like the women planned to do on Sunday. Because it didn't seem to make sense to do the ritual at night, it could have been done in daylight at the final burial site.
Apparently, the only text that mentions the shroud are the gospels.
We had an interesting discussion elsewhere in this comment section. The gentleman, @jeffreyerwin, had alot of good, additional information about the shroud, including physical evidence that it was removed by a mysterious, nonmechanical means from the body.
We believe the shroud is definite proof of a transformation, and we do not have the technology on this planet to recreate the image.
Please find the other area of shroud discussion in these comments. We think you will find it interesting, too...
Not only that, the Shroud has no hint of spices. Thus no reburial.
Tabor ignores the fact that Friday and Saturday were holy days, thus handling dead bodies was not allowed. The women went to the tomb "before dawn" thus no opportunity for reburial. And the women would not have gone to the tomb without someone to remove the stone.
Some good ideas and insights but the focus on the personal body is misplaced. The body of Christ is his political body, his assembly, the church, which is the immortal resurrection body that the gates of hades cannot withstand. 1 Cor. 15 addresses the resurrection body from the issue of how are (present tense) the dead ones (plural) being raised (present tense). He says that they are being raised up in the spiritual body, the singular body with which the plural dead ones come. Stated another way, how are the dead ones of the old body of Israel being raised into the resurrection body of the New Covenant church? Paul say that denying that these dead ones are being raised from Israel constitutes the denial of Christ’s resurrection and the denial of the gospel and the denial of their own resurrection from sin-death. Their faith is futile and they are still in their sins if Christ has not been raised, which he hasn’t if the dead ones of the old body aren’t being then raised.
The dead ones of Israel were being raised into the communion of the saints not by the rising of the flesh and blood body of old Israel. That old body was being sown and dying in the ground, so that the new body could rise up as a shoot, a tender plant that would grow up to become the large tree in which the birds of the air nested and the world would find shade and good fruits, the healing of the nations. This is not about the physical restoration of physical life after physical death.
Christ was the anointed one, the authorised ruler, the manifestation of the power and authority of God in the form of a man. Yet before his incarnation YHWH was the cloud, the pillar of fire by night and the column of smoke by day leading the old body out of bondage. This Christ was invisible and non-human, represented by prophets and priests. This cloud form of YHWH is what they saw at the transfiguration and the form that he had when he rose, the cloud in which the great cloud of witnesses belong also. That cloud form was the invisible God Kimg, ruling and leading without a human form, without physical flesh. Yet he appears in human form from time to time as the Angel of YHWH. This is the form that the Lord ascended to become: invisible and hidden by the cloud because he became that cloud. In that form he promised to return to destroy the old body, the Second Temple, destroying that old creation and its political body. That old body would become the corpse which would attract the vultures. He would come “with his mighty angels” I.e. not personally but by means of the might angels, the agent of wrath to repay the rebels (Rom. 13:2-4). Those might angels came as the legions to dispatch the corpse, just as and when the Lord formally promised. He would do the work of judgment that the Father had given to his hand. By this would his enemies know that he was resurrected and enthroned and crushing them under his feet.
The post resurrection appearances of the Lord in human form are no different from the Old Testament appearances of YHWH in human form to give revelation, to perform signs and to teach. They are also no different from his human appearances as a man during his teaching ministry.
Paul is the false Apostle spoken of in Revelation 2:2
Paul got his Revelations from the angel of Satan that he admitted he was possessed by
lol. Paul was a mystic, like Yeshu, like Cephas, like the author of the third later of John. If one was a demon possessed they all were.
Was Jesus false prophecy any more true than Paul’s.
@@Darisiabgal7573
I didn't say he was demon possessed, I said Paul admitted in his own writings that he was possessed by an Angel of Satan
Paul did not teach what Jesus or the apostles taught he caught his own Gospel
I guess you could call it getting them from Satan, but more likely he just made them up himself (same difference I guess), using Mithraism as a model, like for the "Lord's Supper". And I further believe Paul was the Beast of Revelation, he being a wealthy, born Roman citizen as a result of his Herodian heritage. The number of the Beast is not the anachronistic Arabic numerals, 666, but the Hebrew characters for six-hundred, sixty and six, which through Jewish Gematria decodes to Tarsus, a wealthy city at the time and the Roman center for the pagan mystical cult of Mithraism.
@@onejohn2.26. The agents of God or Satan all stem from the Divine councils of Canaan and Babylon. The first biblicals deamons were the Beliel in Jewish tradition the wicked, whose names reek of the Palmyran Bel gods, the word literally means the wicked one. The angles of Satan are the fallen ones in Christian literature. But Satan wasn’t a name god, he was the adversary, the interrogator, in the story of Job. The story of Job was just a story, it’s part of the Jewish wisdom LITERATURE you take value away from it and impart different meaning when you consider Satan to be a named god.
You can find a list of named gods here on Wikipedia.
List of Deities at Canaanite Religion
At least two of El’s angels were angels in the Canaanite Pantheon
If you examine this list closely you will find several gods of Israel
Anat (Beth Anath, Shamgar of Anath - Judges, Anathoth - Isaiah, wife of YHWH - Egypt, originally Mesopotamian), Athirath (Asherah - Luz (Bethel), the 🕎 - Luz, wife of ‘El - the most high, wife of Yahweh in Edom and 9th century BCE Yehudah), Ba’al Hermon (the god of Mt. Hermon), Astarte (Ishtar), Hadad (“Ba’al” - high god in Canaanite pantheon before Mesopotamian conquest, after which El became high god, son of Dagan), Bel (like Ba’al chief god of the Palmyrans), Gad (tribe of Israel and god of the foothills of mt. Hermon), Hauron (Beth Hauran, Israel - the gateway to the underworld, the passage from the coast to the hill, a pair of settlements), Yam (Psalms , the sea god), Mot (many books, death), Qos (many texts, the Edomite name for Yahweh, originally a SW Arabian/Edomite god), Shapash (female version of Shamesh and possibly the original version at Beth Shamesh), Yarikh (Moon god, a powerful god of Jericho before the UR III conquests), Shalim (Dusk, Peace, Underworld - Salem, foundation of Shalim, Urushalim, Jerusalem) and Shahan (Dawn, a lost city in Jordan) [these two gods are the bastard sons of El that were adopted and raised by Asherah.
List of Mesopotamian deities
If you examine this list closely you will find several gods of Israel
Ishtar (Ester, Ester, Astarte), Dumuzid (Tammuz, Ezekiel), Shamesh (Beth Shamesh), Ea (Ia, Yahu, - Judges), An-Enlil (‘El - the most high), Iskur (Hadad “Ba’al”), Dagan (Judges), Anat see above generally considered a Canaanite goddess, originally from Anah, Iraq)
Demons and primordial gods - Lilitu (Lilith in the Isaiah, night demons), Wife of Absu (Tiamat - Enuma Elis: Tahom - Genesis 1), Absu (Waters beneath the earth - Genesis), Nammu (The goddess who at the instruction of Ea-Yahu made men from clay - Nammu in the Eridu tradition is considered the first goddess and mother of all the other gods), kullulu (Fish man -euhemerized into Abkallu and Jonah), Lahmu (Lahmi - the guardian of Ea -Yahu, the Apotraic figure for which Beth-Lahmi (Bethlehem) was named), Usumgallu (Glistening one, serpent, garden of Eden)
What is to be understood here is that angelology and demonology did not spring into existence.
The gods as you understand them begin with Absu (Swamp - Eridu - the oldest temple E-Absu - foundations are 7000 years old) and the associated sea “thm”. Both are found in Genesis. The next layer of gods are the Early sentient gods. We cannot be certain which sentient god came first, I tend to think Nammu, then Enki and Enlil followed by Anu (Erech). Anu’s priest gave celestial authority to the priesthoods of coalition cities and Innana, the mistress of heaven (Uruk) gave authority to kings via Akitu ceremony, a predecessor of Anointment. During the colonization phase Sumer runs into problems at Shuruppak (the city of the great flood, Genesis) and two major stories come forth, parts of both stories are in Genesis. Then is the Early dynastic period and the expansion of the Marian kings. This is followed by the Dynastic period, Akkad, UR III (possibly the origin of the Abrahamic colonization story in Genesis), Isin Larsa, and Babylon (probably the origin of some conquest stories in Joshua). During this period the sages of Enki either split off or were sent westward for spiritual reasons, some legendary seven, the Apkallu, returned. One so named Oannes is a pretext for the story of Jonah (Ioannes).
During the Dynastic period the Canaanite gods emerge from the substrate prehistoric religion. The system was initially organized around Ebla, whose high god was Ishara, a goddess of prosperity, at this time Hadad was a god of the North. The Eblaites were the first literate Canaanite peoples, and they kept tabs on the other gods, noting that Enki/Ea was often referred to as Ia (Yah-phonecian alephbeth) in parts of Canaan. Given the correspondence with the sages we can speculate that Beth Lahmi in the middle and late Bronze Age was one of their settlements, though I think they moved to the SSE during the LBAC.
During the late Bronze Age many gods just disappeared, their cities destroyed, Israel, an extrajudicial entity during the LBAC became a collective polity during the early Iron Age, At the time it was thoroughly polytheistic with its leaders also polytheistic, its in the Bible itself, the thin veil placed over these legendary figures has been unveiled by archaeological studies from Israel and Mesopotamia and the text has been recontextualized. The mosaic foundational narrative has been shown to be largely myth. There was no Exodus because Egypt occupied Canaan until 1120 BCE when they left. YH was probably a god in Israel during the Early and Middle Iron Age in the territory of Yehudah, still under the auspices of the priesthood of ‘El. During the 9th or 10th century BCE Yahweh, who had been a southwest/west Arabian god made its way into Samaria. Israel Finkelstein speculates that Ahab’s son Nimshi was the first to honor the god. The first inscriptions to YHWH come from Edom and Judah and are late ninth century. They indicate that YHWH is a Samaritan/Edomite/South Arabian god.
The period that follows in Yehudah is the pruning of gods until major sages like Isaiah make the proclamation that the other gods are dead to them, for they have done nothing for the people of YHWH. As stated angels of gods existed prior to this, there were two angels of El that were also biblical. By the time of Nehemiah El had been Absorbed into Yahwism, he appears to have destroyed the relics of El and Asherah in the temple, including the Ark of the Covenent. During the reign of Yosiah, the relics to these gods and other gods were destroyed within and outside Yehudah. This however backfired as this was a signal to the surrounding dynasties that Jerusalem was trying to play a different game. Egypt clamped it down under Necho II and Babylon ended it.
Now the Yahwist were surrounded, completely immersed in Mesopotamian culture and their gods for a period of about 2 generations. At the end of the period they are sent back to reconcile their god with all these fantastic stories, in particularly those of Enki, that sounded a lot like an older version of their god, Yahu, one they had completely merged into YHWH.
And so now they needed to refactor the gods. So instead of having two adopted angels of El, they have many, taking on the powers of certain gods. What to do with all these Bel? Euhemerize them as wicked kings like Nimrod (Nimrud was a capital of Assyria) and other things. They avoid using the Semetic words for sun and moon to avoid confusion with the gods as they rewrite all the stories. The old gods of great kings become the Nephilim, and like the some Mesopotamian gods they are bound to the underworld (Kur) in chains. It literally means they are bound inside the mountain. Instead of the great king surviving the flood and starting a new age of Kish, the old kingdoms are destroyed with their gods . . .but the gods were not killed, they are all over Israel. And so we have a problem, they are the gods of the wicked one, the Beliel . . .the devils. This weak notion in Judaism is strengthened by Egyptian and Greek mythology to create the modern notion of Angels and Demons, both originally of the form Daemones, various tendencies of humans.
If you read the book of John, know one thing, it was not written for the orthodoxy. It was a protognostic text that appeared 100 years before protorthodoxy. iraneaus found it in a collection of gnostic texts. It was not meant for everyone to understand, but a select few, its words are metaphors, these are magical notions to the Christian mystics of the first century. It is like a chant in Hinduism or Buddhism. Its sayings are repetitious because it was meant to be repeated in meditation. Its was the Greco-Roman answer to mysticism in Christianity after all hope of the coming kingdom on earth was lost and the Jerusalem sect was scattered to the four winds. The goal of the mystic was to find the temple in the mystical realm. The reality of John is not a historical reality but a spiritual doorway, don’t seek history in the text, you will be disappointed. And the doorway, it’s a pathway to delusion without reflection. Take the advice of Rabbi Akira and avoid heaven diving.
@@onejohn2.26. None the less the teaching by John the Immerser and Jesus was false. They did not need to repent, then end was not nigh, the kingdom of heaven did not come, and it still hasn’t come.
Saul whom you like to quote comes later after the events of the crucifiction. And therefore he cannot be a reliable witness and the views are his and his alone. When there is smoke there is fire as they say. There was sighting of Jesus in flesh and bones. That should not be discounted like you prefer to do. You have to explain that and not wave it away in preference to the views of Saul. Jesus did not die and he appeared to some people. Jesus when he appeared to them was not a spirit. Easy explanation. There is no need for resurrection and no conspiracy theories.
Dead for 3 days in a sealed tomb guarded by Roman centurion. Then seen alive but able to pass through walls... seen rising into the clouds, had to pass through the firmament ...
A resurrected or 'glorified' body, though still physical, vibrates at a different frequency.
You seem to be reading a lot into the text, without justification (at least from a textual view). Simply because Joseph's new tomb was convenient for burial doesnt then mean his body was subsequently moved. The women knew full well where Joseph and Nicodemus had taken his body, hence why they could visit that tomb on the Sunday morning. Do you really think Joseph or Nicodemus wouldnt have bothered to tell anyone, particularly the women who had stayed for hours at the cross witnessing the death of Jesus, that they had moved his body in the mean time? It appears the only reason youre reading your theory of a second tomb into the text is because you dont believe Jesus' body was physically resurrected (I cant think of any other reason).
The text itself doesnt even hint at such a scenario of a temporary burial.
It's like you weren't quite able to follow the content of the video.
As a historian, you have to have plausible scenarios. A body resurrecting is not one of them.
The ultimate tomb in Talpiot, read Arimathea, was Joseph's, and was new, but the one nearby to the crucifixion wasn't necessarily Joseph of Arimathea's.
@@derekallen4568 that is based on the assumption that either God doesnt exist, or if he does he is unable to raise the dead or chooses never to do so. It is also based on the assumption that Jesus is just another human being, like you and me (Im assuming youre not AI!)
@@PC-vg8vn if you doing engineering or medicine you can't assume the supernatural. If you design a building you don't assume a supernatural being is going to keep it up. The same with medicine or history.
If the tomb is empty you can't presuppose it was a resurrection. That's the last assumption you make.
I’m so surprised how off the mark you are since you’ve studied this stuff all your life and have been to Isreal many times and studied archeological sites. Everyone believes they know the historical location of the crucifixion. It’s a place called Golgotha which translates to something like “the place of the skull”. The location literally had a cave shaped like a skull for thousands of years and only in the last 15 years did the skull like resemblance fall apart. It’s right near where the gate was so geographically it lines up with what the Bible describes. Historically it lines up with Roman behavior to put crucifixions on the main paths leading to the gate. There are local people who would tell archeologists that their grandfathers told them that this is where Christ was crucified. So it’s like pretty well established. The tomb is literally a stones throw away. It is not on the mount of olives as you say. It is in a plot of land that had wine production and grape growing. There’s a channel for a huge round stone to be rolled in front just as the Bible describes. And no one ever found the stone which is in alignment with the teaching of the Bible. Jews never buried anyone the way we do it in the us or in other European countries. They would lay the body in a cave with open cut out windows and they would leave it in there for a long time and the bugs and bacteria and critters would eat all the flesh from the bodies. Then after a designated amount of time they would go back, collect the bones and put them in a bone box and their bones would then go into a family cave with the bones of their ancestors. The Bible specifically said that Jesus was put in a toumb that had never been used before so of coarse there wouldn’t be any bodies or bones of anyone else. Also this is how Lazarus was resurrected by Jesus after he was placed in his tomb/cave. The resurrection is like the fundamental precept of the Christian narrative. God came to earth in human form to die on the cross for All sin part, present and future and he defeated death and went to heaven to return again in the end times. Anybody that makes claims against this simply doesn’t understand the Bible and you’re playing mental gymnastics when the historical evidence overwhelmingly supports the Bible.
It's all mythology. That's what we know for sure.
Oh its yak wees.
Ah james give my brain a rest. Read me some passages previously traveled.
???
52:12
A dna birth mark look atitmary its jesus reborn yes he shall be known a john jacks its sounds jaquees is that another name for a hebrew jews.
Jesus is Alive. Call out to Him . Ask for guidance and discernment. He loves you 🙌🏽🙏🏽☝🏾💕🧂
Blahahaha
He is dead and mythology
The important fact, often overlooked, is that Jesus' tomb was NOT found empty! His bloody burial shroud and his post-crucifixion face cloth were both found in the tomb. That is not an empty tomb, and that fact is very important because the presence of those bloody cloths proves that Jesus' corpse was not stolen or otherwise removed by being carried away. Any group of men or disciples attempting to carry away the corpse would certainly have left it in its shroud. There was absolutely no point of or necessity to the removal of three pounds of essential cloth from a 170 pound corpse.
That burial shroud is still in existence today and has been carefully examined. It shows the images of a human body that has been executed by crucifixion exactly as is described in the Gospels. Furthermore, that dead body appears to have been removed from its shroud by a mysterious non-mechanical means as none of the cloth's threads are torn and none of the blood marks disturbed. That suggests that the corpse in question dematerialized.
Pehaps a little more attention ought to be paid by our archaeologist to archaelology in his attempts to understand scripture.
Great points, bless you brother
First off, the Shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery. Proven. Not even the style of shrouds really used. And of course those who removed his body removed the bloody temporary shroud and discarded it.
ad-hoc explanations that have never been confirmed. Jesus might as well have been teleported by aliens, and this explanation still fits the evidence and is as unproven as the other supernatural explanations.
@@rickshannon2044 I kind of find it difficult that any Jew would preserve a blood-stained shroud, as it would likely be ritually unclean. you know, Jews have something against touching blood.
amein ameen
Does the Shroud of Turin have any historical relations to the Talbiot Family Jesus Tomb or is it all a hoax?
They can't even date it, or show how it was created, with any certainty. But whether it was from Jesus or not, it doesn't change the narrative James Tabor is offering here, and which I think is correct.
It's definitely not a hoax. We don't have the technology to recreate the image. The plant microscopic evidence, what csi calls "hair & fiber" places it in the geographical area. The headpiece is a perfect match that was located elsewhere, Spain?, since the 4th or 5th century. Please go to Dr. Tabor's website & read his writings on the Shroud.
@@mahlonmarr856 I get that but, it needs to follow the critical steps. Like why would the burial party wrap Jesus in the shroud and then unwrap him to take him to the second burial place to once again wrap him in his final state of decay?
@@silvermoontearoom7123 I get you but and I have read tabors breakdown on his discovery of the tomb of the shroud. My issue is trying to figure out why would the burial party wrap Jesus in the shroud, then unwrap him and leave the shroud behind when transporting the body to the final burial tomb. Dr. Tabor has only brefielfy mentioned it, but not a full on detailed look into what really went down. I would especially love to hear what he has to say about the shroud of turin as he is a expert in studying later Christian medieval practices in that period of time.
@@7EV1Nany number of reasons, the easiest being, they just wanted a fresh shroud instead of a gory bloody one. Another could be so they'd be less likely to draw any attention. And they didn't have hearses then, so moving shrouded, bodies around wouldn't have been unusual, unless the shrouds were bloody.