Dead, Twice Buried, and An Empty Tomb?

In this final segment of my series on Final Days of Jesus over "Holy Week" as the Christian call it, I consider the burial and empty tomb accounts in the Gospels, as well as "sightings" of Jesus.
One little known text, not covered in this video, the Gospel of Peter, changes everything and support's Mark's abrupt ending...
“Now it was the final day of Unleavened Bread [i.e., Thursday following crucifixion]; and many went out returning to their home since the feast was over. But we twelve disciples of the Lord were weeping and sorrowful; each one sorrowful because of what had come to pass, departed to his home [in the Galilee]. But I, Simon Peter, and my brother Andrew, having taken our nets, went off to the sea. And there was with us Levi of Alphaeus whom the Lord . . .
Clearly, in this tradition, that I think must predate the Synoptics, in this section at least, the followers of Jesus do not have any resurrection faith or "sightings" of Jesus until AFTER the days of Unleavened Bread--when they head back to Galilee, a full week AFTER Jesus' death.
Please access the blog posts that lay out these issues in GREAT detail. Here is the link to "Final Days of Jesus: Digging into the Sources":
• Final Days of Jesus: ...
One-line Course: Creating Jesus--Why Mark's Gospel was Forgotten
sales.mvp-cour...
Support Dr. Tabor’s Research: / jamesdtabor
About Dr. Tabor: jamestabor.com...
Academic Blog: jamestabor.com;
KZbin: / jamestaborvideos
Tabor Books:
www.amazon.com...
Academia:independent.ac...
Instagram: / drjdtabor
Twitter: / jamesdtabor
Facebook: / jamesdtabor
LinkedIn:
/ james-tabor-12119324
Personal Blog: genesia.org

[@toneysmith4946]

I am seeking true thanks James

[@stormlord1984]

Professor, I could spend my whole day just listening to your lectures. Knowledgeable, and so charismatic. You are a treasure!

[@wataboutya9310]

My question is this, what tool could have been used to extract the long stout nails that were driven through Jesus hands and feet and into a solid wood beam with a heavy hammer? There are many bones in the hands and feet, yet none were broken during the entire ordeal.

[@DoloresLehmann]

But how would it be imaginable that Jesus' family moved and reburied the body and didn't tell any of this to the disciples and Mary Magdalene? Even after they reunited and James took over the movement, did he not mention it on purpose to make the disciples believe that Jesus resurrected? There's no scenario in which this could have played out without malevolent deception.

[@toneysmith4946]

Hey if you can answer back what about the Scripture. that says that the guards washed over the body to make sure no one came back and took it.

[@sunshine_schleichs]

Scripture says the guards were "like dead men" when they saw the angel roll back the stone. If you were like a dead man you may not be watching over anything.

[@residuejunkie4321]

*Everyone better find out why "Easter'' is now in the King James bible!*

[@LyleFrancisDelp]

True. The word Easter is not Hebrew. Not Aramaic. Not Greek.

[@residuejunkie4321]

@@LyleFrancisDelp *Good, now you BETTER find out why it's in the bible!*

[@LyleFrancisDelp]

@@residuejunkie4321 Why should I?

[@termination9353]

Tabor is way wrong - The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@LyleFrancisDelp]

@@termination9353 Your view is total human construct. No basis in real scholarship. You can believe what you like, but that doesn’t make it fact.

[@martinharrison7536]

Since most people don’t actually read the Bible he’s adding in a lot of extra detail that is not actually in the book but I guess most won’t care it’s good entertainment

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@michaelpickett1460]

​@@termination9353 Gnosticism plus fairy dust. If you love truth you'll hear the truth.

[@widowssontony.9268]

It all comes to FAITH. Either you believe or you don't believe in him. This is all waist of time for the believers who don't agree about this. Jesus Has Risen. 🙏✝️🙏

[@ShirleyShirley-t5f]

Do new opinions matter to believers? Are we worshipping place, rocks, idols?

[@maryannec55]

Since we've heard he was supposed to be in the tomb 3 days and 3 nights, as a former SDA we were taught that he died on Wednesday. Buried and in tomb Wed. night, Thurs. night and Fri. night (3 nights) & Thurs. day, Fri. day and Sat. day (3 days). In 34AD Passover (a high Sabbath) was on Thurs. - so Wed. would have been 'preparation day' (not for the WEEKLY Sabbath).

[@adamnascent7231]

Dan McClellan just released a video addressing this, in short that's not what a "High Day" really means, and the gospels simply aren't in agreement on how long Jesus was in the grave, but "3 days and 3 nights" could still be a literary device to refer to 3 inclusive days, not literally 3 days and 3 nights.

[@maryannec55]

@@adamnascent7231 That's what Doug Batchelor used to say about the 3 days, that they were "inclusive". But now, as for myself, I think the whole story was made up. I think Herod had his men go steal the body.

[@adamnascent7231]

@@maryannec55 Oh yeah, I think it's made up, too, at least the resurrection bit. :) I'm not sure if there ever was an empty tomb in the first place, it's not a "minimal fact" at least.

[@CyntheaAnderson]

I am not SDA, but learned this also.

[@deethornburg4014]

All your thoughts James are theories, no facts, no belief that Jesus rose as written and him seen by over 500 people, and his ascension as stated by Luke.

[@sriramkumar9577]

Dr. Tabor your seminar is very intriguing and I every time feel that you are a living university of Archaeology and THEOLOGY. 👍👍👍

[@termination9353]

Tabor is way wrong - The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@sriramkumar9577]

@@termination9353 so, you mean to say that your research is far better than Dr. TABOR. WHAT'S YOUR QUALIFICATION? AND HOW DID YOU COME TO THIS CONCLUSION?

[@termination9353]

@@sriramkumar9577 The Gospel narrative itself tells us starting with John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true." linkes in my about page to qualifications. But I was born and raised Orthodox Jew, studied Yeshiva, read and write Hebrew, and am an accredited Rabbi.

[@sriramkumar9577]

@@termination9353 yah, I too read about knights templers and fell sorry for them. They are all burnt at stake. Church got jealous as templers raised to power and the dirty Church banished them. Jesus is a ✡ jew, he never new christianity. He was buried according to the Jewish tradition. Christianity hijacked his preaching and devoured him.

[@termination9353]

@@sriramkumar9577 I'm saying that most of what tabor claims has no academic backing that he says it does. There is no academic backing for the time any of these Gospels were first composed. But these pundits throw these false datings around like its truth.

[@georgenorris2657]

Crossan suggests that Jesus´ body was more likely cast into a lime pit along with the other criminals crucified that day. I was initially shocked at this idea but it does fit with historical knowledge about Roman procedure. For me, it is really the psalms and the prophets that hold the key to the disciples´ interpretation of the meaning of Jesus´ death. Something that happened gradually and quietly as they read and prayed together in the weeks following the event.

[@shirleysmith9421]

All we know is through some very difficult times we prayed in the Name of Jesus and we were delivered from our bad situations❤❤😂😊

[@Marabarra134]

he was never burried. mythical stories. they left them on the cross as an example.

[@elaineparisi8626]

Very interesting Thank you.

[@elizabeth_777]

Thank you Dr. Tabor 🤓

[@thephoenix0494]

Unfortunately, this video confirms my doubts. Shows that you can be a great scholar, have all the knowledge in the world, and yet still not know him. One day, every knee will bow before Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Also, the name of the land is Israel - not Palestine.

[@groovidg]

Always looking for blasphemous reasons to explain away the resurrection. At the same time quick to convince to explain the supernatural, aliens or Big Foot.

[@harryhagman6063]

HE IS RISEN GLORY HALLELUJAH 😇👍👀

[@simonh6788]

Not sure you listened to this lecture then

[@richardraymond9108]

​@@simonh6788 listening is not believing

[@chiararomano1818]

@@richardraymond9108if you followed your own statement, you wouldn’t believe the gospels either.

[@dr.monoarhossain6586]

No hallelujah ,its Alhamdulillah.

[@jasongallman2032]

​@@richardraymond9108believing is dishonest

[@elainegoad9777]

Romans always left the executed corpses on the crosses to rot and be eaten by birds, etc... as an example to others not to challenge the Roman Government. Biblical "stories/myths" were written about 70-100 after the death of someone called, Yeshua who was executed for sedition against the Roman Government. These mythogical stories were written in Greek, by people who never even knew Yeshua or any of the original followers. None of the "gospel" myths agree with each other. Jesus raised from the dead ??????? Nope

[@peterhook2258]

To many religious cultures, spiritual texts are suppose to contain hidden or encoded sacred information and not be considered historical (to insiders)..if you dont think Judaism is involved in this ..look into the Zohar and the four ways Jewish Kabbalist look at scripture. Literalism is low on the list. Even the Romans and Greeks are known for their "mystery schools". In Christianity gnostics were known for this hence all the pseudepigrapha. To the outsiders, fables..to the elite, gnostic, enlightened etc..hidden sacred meaning.

[@termination9353]

Jesus was announced as king of Israel in that choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Quickly said, Pilot dressed Jesus up as King, Pilot presented Jesus to the Sanhedrin and high priest among the crowd as "their King". Told the crowd to choose to crucify "their King" or Barabbas. The Saducees and High Priest chose "their king" Jesus to be crucified and instigated the Jewish crowd to choose "their King" to be crucified..... and so the Priesthood anointed Jesus as their king in order for him to be executed. And Pilat published this fact above Jesus head at a time when Jerusalem was most crowded of Jews from all over the realm. What this accomplished was to legalize according to Torah law Jesus' amended covenant and make irrelevant all burdensome Talmudic rules. I think Jesus and Pilat planned it together. Neet trick on the Sanhedrin huh.

[@sburns2421]

John Dominic Crossman contends he was left on the cross and eaten by animals. I can't argue with his educated opinion, other than to say we do have a handful of buried skeletons that show the marks of crucifixion. It may have been common practice to leave them up, but some were taken down.

[@Marabarra134]

James is very gullible here. there was never an empty grave. romans left them on the cross and nobody washes a body 3 days after a burial. makes no sense at all. this is clearly a myth. very strange that an intelligent man can't see that...

[@patbrennan6572]

Jesus was a scapegoat, imagine telling a kid that he's the son of god, that would really screw up his life.

[@xifangyangren9997]

Joe of Arimathea may have owned lots of tombs around Jerusalem for sale. That’s one possible way he got so rich.

[@svemory]

WOW I never heard about the tomb in Svat -- but that is a very profound area; the whole north is magnetic, a different intensity from Jerusalem -- less heavy -- but you can feel magic in the air. Dittto Qumran

[@ohfft]

The christian claim Christ will return again, doesn't necessarily refer to an identity, rather to another blessed person who stands out to represent truth and light. Unlike the christian idea that the very same identity will come back twice! Just as Son of God was also a hebrew term for a blessed person, seen many time in the Torah and Messiah not just reffering to one identity, messiah could come in each generation, if everythingv aligned. Like flower popping up in spring, if there was no drought! The christian ideology around these things is a flawed one!

[@HandofOmega]

Assuming our dates of the cruxifiction are correct (AD 33), then it's interesting to consider that exactly 2000 years ago, Jesus still has 10 years left to live! What was he doing this exact day and hour, two thousand years ago? If he was divine, had he fully realized it yet? Was he just enjoying himself, with friends and family, before beginning his mission? Or was he just some random guy, who unwittingly was about to stumble into becoming the most famous person in history?

[@peterhook2258]

I know exactly what he was doing. Passover stuff for sure.

[@Jd-808]

He was probably doing construction maybe in Tiberius which was founded around that time

[@dissidentfairy4264]

The alternative probability and in my mind the most believable is a supernatural resurrection just as the three gospels report. It was an interesting slide show.

[@dreznik]

Six hours on the cross will not kill a healthy 33-yr-old. His legs were not broken. Occam's Razor would suggest his ressurrection was from a comatose state. Joseph of Arimathea -- a wealthy senator -- probably bribed Pilate to be able to take JC down from the cross so quickly, before his death. His friends and family helped him heal, he was seen by some, and got the hell out of Judea.

[@HandofOmega]

Yeah, I once asked someone how long they thought it would normally take to die from that, and they assumed that Jesus must have lasted FAR longer than the average person could have; they were surprised when I told them that we have accounts of people lasting for DAYS...Even one of the gospels alludes to this, when told that Jesus is dead, someone asks, "Already?" Some have speculated that the "bitter gall" he was given to drink may have been a drug that induced a death-like state, and that some of the large amounts of spices the women took to the tomb may have had medicinal uses...

[@johnmichaelson9173]

I couldn't agree more, it just doesn't make sense. Also one minute Jesus basically has superpowers the next he's dead after six hours, when we know a normal healthy man could last days on a cross.

[@johnmichaelson9173]

@@HandofOmega I find it strange that Jesus a man with miraculous powers would die so quickly and easily after only a matter of hours on the cross. The whole thing feels off, it's undeniable suspicious.

[@dreznik]

@@johnmichaelson9173 to speed up the death romans would break their legs to promote asfixiation

[@dreznik]

imagine if the religion of more than a billion people today, and the 1000+ yrs of violence, murder, plundering, libels, and persecution it has relentlessly carried out on jews -- eye witnesses to the whole thing -- were predicated on such a childish fabrication.

[@pauldonohue7672]

There is a tradition supported by the New Testamant..The followers of Jesus followed his orders: They got the body and ate it!

[@JacquesMare]

😄😄😄😄

[@robertvictory8391]

and if the Messiah has not been raised, your trust is useless, and you are still in your sins.

[@ronster6017]

I guess we'll see what happens..✝🛐 "Every knee shall bow......"

[@davekearney1944]

For me, the most mysterious aspect of Mark's gospel is the women's response to the news. They are told that Jesus is resurrected. Jesus has prophesied this several times in Mark. Wouldn't they find these glad tidings to be a cause of great joy and ecstasy? The prophesy had come true!! Jesus was risen! Instead they are afraid, run away and tell no one of the prophesied miracle. They should have been shouting it from the rooftops.

[@peterhook2258]

You got it. People need to let the NT be what it is, an esoteric rendering, as such was very customary to give in that culture. Hidden meanings are contained within the text, more important than historical info I have found in esoteric circles that add up way better to the text than historical accuracy. Everything was a mystery and encoded back then.

[@sburns2421]

@@peterhook2258 Yes you hide your meaning because Rome still had absolute power over life and death. (revelations is perhaps the best example of this). Couple this with the huge blow of the Temple being destroyed right before Mark was written and the revolt still ongoing...and writing explicitly against Rome rather than symbolism and they would have a cross for you too. IMO the destruction of the Temple is the third most significant thing within the NT (after the teaching of Jesus and later works of Paul that made Christianity palatable to non-Jews). In 70 AD, Jews at the time would have felt that their world was coming to an end, Gentiles may have thought that Judaism itself was soon to be extinct. Is it possible that Christianity made a conscious effort to give both groups a monotheistic redemptive religion after that monumental demolition in Jerusalem?

[@peterhook2258]

@@sburns2421 really good insight , agreed.

[@termination9353]

- The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@sburns2421]

@@termination9353 what you are doing is beyond obnoxious and ultimately counterproductive to your credibility

[@WoundedEgo]

In John's gospel, Joseph and Nicodemus do the embalming immediately after retrieving the body, because the sun was going down. The tomb is a "new memorial" in which no one had yet been laid," and had a closing stone, so this seems to not be an unimproved cave: [Jhn 19:39-41 NASB95] [39] Nicodemus, who had first come to Him by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds [weight.] [40] So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen wrappings with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. [41] Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb [ie: memorial] in which no one had yet been laid. [Isa 53:9 NKJV] [9] And they made His grave with the wicked--But with the rich at His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor [was any] deceit in His mouth. --- Mark says "it had been hewn," and ends with just an empty tomb when the lady/ladies go to embalm the body: [Mar 15:45-47 NASB95] [45] And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph. [46] Joseph bought a linen cloth, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen cloth and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. [47] Mary Magdalene and Mary the [mother] of Joses were looking on [to see] where He was laid. [Mar 16:1-8 NASB95] [1] When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the [mother] of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. [2] Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. [3] They were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?" [4] Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large. [5] Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. [6] And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, [here is] the place where they laid Him. [7] "But go, tell His disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.'" [8] They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. So the details vary from author to author, so every exposition is tainted by the GIGO Effect.

[@tarikramadaan3342]

Why the father sent His Son As Sacrifice and Not Himself ??

[@alanteare1603]

Fathers are always sending their sons into battle. It is an archetype.

[@johnmichaelson9173]

Personally I'm thinking God isn't Jesus's father. I mean have you ever heard such a load of rubbish as a omnipotent, omnipresent God sacrificing his son, for our sins? While Jesus's teachings are admirable he was delusional regarding the supposed imminent apocalyptic scenario with the coming of Angels ushering in a new age of which he'd be the Messiah. He was wrong & it cost him his life.

[@derekallen4568]

​@@johnmichaelson9173 "have you ever heard such rubbish as a god sacrificing his son." Yes! It's called Christianity.

[@termination9353]

Jesus was not a sacrifice. It was a brilliant tactical legal maneuver. Jesus was announced as king of Israel in that choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Quickly said, Pilot dressed Jesus up as King, Pilot presented Jesus to the Sanhedrin and high priest among the crowd as "their King". Told the crowd to choose to crucify "their King" or Barabbas. The Saducees and High Priest chose "their king" Jesus to be crucified and instigated the Jewish crowd to choose "their King" to be crucified..... and so the Priesthood anointed Jesus as their king in order for him to be executed. And Pilat published this fact above Jesus head at a time when Jerusalem was most crowded of Jews from all over the realm. What this accomplished was to legalize according to Torah law Jesus' amended covenant and make irrelevant all burdensome Talmudic rules. I think Jesus and Pilat planned it together. Neet trick on the Sanhedrin huh.

[@peterhook2258]

theological, Father of Adam entered and merged with Yeshua leaving two in one body. Father did participate. So many views on this in early Christianity. Too much for this format but its no issue.

[@theresemalmberg955]

The biggest objection I can see to your idea that Jesus' body was reburied by his mother, his sister Salome and perhaps Mary and Martha is that if that were the case then why didn't they speak up when Mary Magdalene and the disciples said that they couldn't find Jesus' body but they had somehow seen him alive? If anyone moved the body, I'd put my money on Nicodemus and Joseph because they were not part of Jesus' inner circle; although, again, why didn't they speak out? Or, perhaps some other members of the Sanhedrin or even the Romans themselves because they didn't want the tomb becoming a pilgrimage site. Now, as to why the Sanhedrin and/or the Romans didn't bring out Jesus' dead body to counteract claims that he had risen from the dead, number one, Jesus never appeared in public after being laid in the tomb. As far as the Romans were concerned, it was radio silence. So why should they care about people reporting sightings? Why bother to go exhume a body based on rumors? The troublemaker himself was gone, and that was all they cared about. They had no real reason to parade Jesus' decaying body through the streets; they'd already sent a message with the crucifixion. As long as the man himself did not appear and start stirring things up again, who cared what his followers were saying? Number two, which is something I think a lot of people forget, is that the disciples did not go public with the news that Jesus had risen right away. It was not until Pentecost that they came out of hiding, so to speak, and started telling the crowds that "the Jesus you killed has been raised from the dead". The Romans, who featured so prominently in the events around Passover, are conspicuously absent from this story. That doesn't make sense. You have another major feast with pilgrims pouring in from all over the Roman world, a crowd gathering outside what appears to be the recently-executed would-be Messiah's headquarters, with very fresh memories of what happened at Passover, and you don't think the Romans would not have taken note? I'm sure that they were very much aware but after investigating would conclude there doesn't seem to be anything to see here. At any rate, given the climate and the amount of time that had passed since Passover and Pentecost (roughly two months if not more), if they did have the body, there probably wouldn't have been enough of it left to be recognizable. So again, what would be the point? Number three, if the Romans couldn't and didn't produce a dead body, neither could the disciples produce a LIVING body. Remember, Jesus ascended into heaven. He may be risen, but he is also NOT HERE. Not in the tomb, not in the temple, not in the upper room, not in the streets, he is NOT HERE. It is left to others to make this announcement of his resurrection. That crowd outside Peter's house in Acts must have been super polite, unlike the mockers at Jesus' crucifixion, because there is no record of any hecklers shouting, "if he is alive, then where is he? Ascended to heaven? Oh . . . how convenient . . . you can't produce him? Hmm." To me, this is the biggest argument AGAINST the resurrection being anything more than visionary experiences. You want me to believe that someone who was very publicly executed--no doubt in anyone's mind the dude is dead, dead, dead--is walking around alive, then either bring him out so I can talk to him, or take me to him. That is something NOBODY has been able to do in 2,000 years. They cannot produce a physical Jesus. They can "induce" a mental experience of Jesus, but that is all they can do.

[@neclark08]

The corpse taken off the cross late Friday (hours after its 3pm death), and stashed in an available tomb, DIDN'T 'take back life again' after three FULL days & nights mid-afternoon on either Thursday or Friday(*)...EITHER time span falls-short of the 72 hours promised by A REAL, Resurrection-expecting Super-Natural Messiah: The Thuesday Dusk- to Pre-Dawn Sunday scenario could be as short as 45 hours (6pmThurs-->deep-darkness 9pm Sat), but no longer or for the Friday scenarion, mid-afternoon on Monday ( Fri-->Sat, Sat-->Sun, & Sun-->Mon). The body that Vanished from the crypt some time before dawn on Sunday (which conveniently Guaranteed NO Eyes-On Witnesses) had Not 'stayed DEAD' for the span promised by the living Juh--HEEZ-Zuss...(maybe he 'lost track of time' in the sunlight-deprived tomb ?) And it's FOOLISH to believe that "The Son of god" -- who purportedly 'teleported' substantial distances several times to supposedly ask "Miss Me Much?" of claimed hundreds who recognized him -- would've NEEDED to roll-aside "the great stone"...he could've snapped his fingers to Trans-Substantiate outdoors. Only human "Body-Snatchers" would need to 'use the door'. And in their haste to act before people were stirring, the Tomb Robbers left that door standing wide-open... (*) Scholars find support for both Thursday, and Friday -- using knowable moon phase calculations and Pesach (Passover) & Shabbat (Sabbath) practices in 1st C. BCE.

[@viz8746]

I am mystified sometimes by Prof Tabor (and co.) - when Mark alone is “silent” regarding the (physical) resurrection at the Arimathea tomb and “sightings" while the other 3 Gospels allude to them, it is claimed that “Mark’s voice is silenced” - Yet when all four Gospels clearly exonerate/diminish Pontius Pilate’s role in the crucifixion, it is Tabor and Co. eager not to be branded anti-Semitic and acting under the influence of post-Holocaust Caucasian guilt, who do the “silencing” themselves, preferring instead to cite and set store by Philo of Alexandria (with all HIS biases) who paints Pilate as a “merciless and obstinate” Prefect who executes those “untried and uncondemned”, supplemented by slanted references form Josephus and Tacitus (Annals 15:44) who refer to the procurator (sic) Pilate’s dispensing to Christus the “extreme penalty” under Tiberius etc. (notice, this referece to Christus from Tacitus from around 115AD, whilst happily taken up in defense of the Jews, is nonetheless deemed insufficient in support of Jesus’s historicity!). - I am reminded of Jesus in Matthew 11:16 “To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplace calling out to others: “We played the pipe for you and you did not dance; we sang a dirge and you did not mourn”! - Notwithstanding the fact that Luke 13:1 clearly states Pilate mixed the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices, and thus no credible charge of Roman ingratiation or Pilate’s absolution for reasons of polical expedience can be laid against Luke and the Synoptic authors and John. - I marvel at the sort of faux-knowledge and (mis)information self-confessed Atheist “Biblical" scholars like Ehrman and his peer American academics like Tabor peddle to their delusional American faux-Christian pupils, that they have to place themselves in deep debt and plead with screams before the Supreme Court for student loan cancellation.

[@ohfft]

"They didn't actually kill him, it just appeared so"!!!

[@ohfft]

If a person dies and gets brought back to life, did they really die and resurrected? Today that how you have to judge this, otherwise millions of people have resurrected from the dead this century,

[@suichinggo8236]

For people who read the Bible, contrary to what most of us mistakenly believed, one should have noticed one glaring reality, God used ordinary people. Possibly, God had waited till the time of Moses, a literate Jew, to start the Torah, the old testament of the Bible to be written, a hard copy of the revelation of who God is, as He related to humans, Israel, and to state in prophesies His plan for mankind. But wisely, God was not clear about Jesus, otherwise how would Isaiah 53 be fulfilled without Him contradicting Himself against human sacrifices, without commanding the **Pharisees**, !(Leviticus 4), to send Jesus to the cross as the atonement sacrifice for humanity?, and how would the Jews who in reverence to God would only refer to Him as G-d and L-d, would have thought of harming Jesus if they are fully informed of who Jesus is? The Jews only idea about Jesus was the possibility that He is their Messiah who will liberate them from Rome. **IF** I could not fully remember the chronology of my activities yesterday, how illogical it would be to expect Jesus' witnesses who were not warned of the responsibility that would be placed upon them, to remember everything exactly as they happened. The inconsistencies proves the veracity of the "gospels". In reality, if people saw the "cadaver" walking and talking, they will not be interested about the tomb. Maybe much later just for the purpose of documentation, that the writer tried to find out what happened after the crucifixion, and with the least people to have known the exact incidence it might be less precise. A "copy" to be able to fool anyone should have a certain truth to it. For Islam to be accepted as true, there should be some truth in it. And obviously, at the time of Muhammad, Jesus miracles, and Him being seen alive would have also been known even among the Arabs, that there seems to be controversy whether He was really crucified and died or not. For everything had been in God's control. To avoid rioting, the crucifixion happened the day before Sabbath, and with most people only walking to move around, it's highly probable that most Jews are in their localities near to stay home at Sabbath. So, mostly interested residence of Jerusalem would have only witnessed the Crucifixion. So, after Sabbath there will be no cause for riots, for "the crucified" was alive.

[@drisgorilla5382]

One thing's for sure - we will find out indeed if Jesus resurrected from the dead. Look at it without bias or assumption, and there's still sufficient evidence to believe he did.

[@ezekielsaltar4728]

I've come to realize that the bedrock belief for Christianity is faith in the Resurrection. Without it there is no Christianity. I have also come to realize that the two other monotheistic faiths, Rabbinic Judaism and Islam are both reactions in the unbelief of Jesus' Resurrection. Once Jewish people came in contact with the resurrected Jesus, they had to ask this question - what was so special about Jesus that God resurrected him, and how do I get resurrected? The answer for the early church was Pauline Christianity. Jesus was the most Righteous and therefore was resurrected. All the sects/denominations that have sprung since then deal with the question of how one becomes a candidate for resurrection, meaning what ancillary beliefs must one have to be resurrected. Catholics who observe the sacrements are resurrected, as are Baptists that are baptized and Pentecostals that speak in tongues, etc. The answer for the Jews who didn't believe in the resurrection was Rabbinical Judaism. Jesus couldn't be the most righteous because only those who follow Torah to the letter are the most righteous. Hasidim Jews are a clear example of observing the Torah in order to be righteous enough for resurrection. The answer for the Ishmaelites was that Jesus was not resurrected but taken up like Enoch and Elijah, therefore the most righteous is defined by Isiam. Suicide terrorists are one extreme example of what one has to do to get resurrected wrt Islam. If you want to start a new religion today, you must deal with Jesus' resurrection and how one becomes righteous enough to be resurrected themselves.

[@ajeet490]

You say that Jesus must have been dead after a Roman crucifixion although a very short one, a few hours ,even Pilate asked if he could really be dead ,before he gave permission for the body to be taken down. You also say his body lay for 3 days in the tomb so must have been dead but his body was taken down from the cross shortly before the Sabbath and his followers came to his tomb at sunrise on the day after Sabbath. So that's just one and a half days. Less if he was taken away during the previous night.

[@johannesdesiltenio]

i wish everyone who is emboldened by traditional teachings, as i was, could at least admit that this is a good historical reading.

[@Marabarra134]

no i don't. romans didn't bury crucified people and nobody washes a body 3 days after a burial. that happens before a burial. it's clearly a made up story, a myth...

[@alanmoberly64]

I hear a whole lot of conjecture and assumption. I see a man filling in information to prove with his pre formed assumptions. Once again I feel for this man. Trying so hard to craft a narrative.

[@kennethbrownsher1264]

Once James dies, the Gentile Church under Paul becomes under the influence of Greco-Roman thought. Plus Paul came from Tarsus a major center of the Mystery Cults.

[@revelator5754]

There was a showdown for the ruler of the known world. Someone had to lose. If you can't win, flip the story. Makes for good reading.

[@wernersalzl1650]

The right man in the right place of history. With German roots. May God bless you further.

[@yadidlechem2357]

Watched Myth Vision with Lena Einhorn, she wrote a book about Jesus the Egyptian and the NT shift of time.

[@dennisstephens8793]

if you are going to shift a body in a hurry ..id think you would move with the presently wrapped body ..not move it un wrapped and rewrap the body because of time and respect

[@geoattoronto]

We are ignoring a possibility that Jesus had the capacity to dematerialize his body creating an imprint on the shroud and also the capacity to appear on materialized form behind closed doors. The resurrection can be attributed to his advanced abilities as a spiritual master.

[@WagesOfDestruction]

I find it very hard to believe that the Cabalist of the 16th century is a reputable source on such matters.

[@conanbankens9036]

Love your studies. Thank you

[@Jorge-cf6xk]

Always enjoy your presentation. Where does it say that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were members of the Sanhedrin ?? Thank you for your research and insight.

[@HistoryandReviews]

It says it in Luke who DOES NOT mention a “Nicodemus” Because Nicodemus is made up in John

[@deethornburg4014]

John 19: 39 And Nicodemus came also.

[@deethornburg4014]

You mention Jesus body was buried in haste without spices. John19:40 says " And so they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen wrapping with the spices , as is the burial custom of the Jews."

[@manyfeather2knives423]

Why don’t these theories have reliable sources. Why is you story the only acceptable story?

[@iananderson-ley1847]

Dr.Tabor is the best. Great man great scholar. Thank you for these lectures

[@davethebrahman9870]

The only quibble I would have with this excellent summary is in respect of Mark not describing a resurrection. This is of course strictly speaking correct. But isn’t Mark 14:28, ‘after he was risen’, effectively a foreshadowing of a resurrection, from which we may infer that Mark originally had a resurrection account, which was later ‘edited’ by Christian scribes because it jarred with the other gospels?

[@dbarker7794]

I'm no scholar but it seems to me that you make a great point about that "after I have risen" quote. I've not seen Dr Tabor or any of the other experts discuss this and wonder why.

[@glennmaillard5972]

Or the statement was just another later embellishment to suit the later narrative

[@JacquesMare]

@22:11...... why would they transport a decaying corpse for a hundred km over many days to inter it at a grave site unknown to anybody, when Jewish traditions (just like Islam) require the burual to take place on the same day the person dies, before sunset? Also what does Jewish tradition at the time say about moving a corpse (sometime AFTER burial)? Was that allowed, or did the taboo only develop later?

[@sburns2421]

In normal practice at the time, after about a year the skeleton would be moved to an ossuary, or "bone box" for eternity. Or at least until grave robbers broke into the tomb and sold the ossuary to an antiquities dealer several centuries later. So they did handle bodies after initial burial.

[@termination9353]

Jesus was announced as king of Israel in that choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Quickly said, Pilot dressed Jesus up as King, Pilot presented Jesus to the Sanhedrin and high priest among the crowd as "their King". Told the crowd to choose to crucify "their King" or Barabbas. The Saducees and High Priest chose "their king" Jesus to be crucified and instigated the Jewish crowd to choose "their King" to be crucified..... and so the Priesthood anointed Jesus as their king in order for him to be executed. And Pilat published this fact above Jesus head at a time when Jerusalem was most crowded of Jews from all over the realm. What this accomplished was to legalize according to Torah law Jesus' amended covenant and make irrelevant all burdensome Talmudic rules. I think Jesus and Pilat planned it together. Neet trick on the Sanhedrin huh.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

Two big problems with Tabors' hypothesis: First, Jesus' bloody burial shroud was found in his original tomb. Jewish law at that time required that post-mortem blood be interened with the corpse, and there was a lot of that blood on Jesus' burial shroud. If disciples could carry away a 170 lb. corpse, why wouldn't they be able to remove 3 lbs. of essential cloth? Second: that burial cloth still exists and is known as the Shroud of Turin. What is very strange about this cloth is that it has images of a corpse, one that has been executed by crucifixion. The Shroud has been subjected to rigous scientific analysis which has proven its authenticity. Why our good professor can't accept this fact may be that it would falsify his dearly held theologies.

[@nohbuddy1]

The shroud isn't real and you still believing that debunked nonsense is astounding

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

The Shroud doesn't exist? A figment of our imaginations? LOL! That's a good one! What is truly astounding the the MOUNTAIN of scientific and historical evidence that supports the Holy Shroud's authenticity. The only things that have been "debunked" are the debunkers. You present no rational argument because you have none.@@nohbuddy1

[@albionicamerican8806]

There are ancient empty tombs all over the world, like the one for the Persian Emperor Cyrus the Great, in Pasargadae, Iran. No one believes that Cyrus' tomb is empty because he rose from the dead, but rather they attribute it to the ordinary reality that someone removed his body centuries ago.

[@peterhook2258]

The raising of the body from the dead although central to mainstream christianity is less important to spirituality in the end. A display of the supernatural appeals more to a childlike wishfulness or a "proof". And no such proofs are needed. Soon, modern religion will not demand such things imo. There really is no need for it.

[@philipfarnam6013]

@@peterhook2258 Agree. The mythology stands alone and faith in its veracity is apparently enough for many. However, there remains the rationality/believability problem in 2023...tough nut, that.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@SNORKYMEDIA]

​@@termination9353 sorry just another claim

[@termination9353]

@@SNORKYMEDIA A claim I can back up. starting with the scriptures themselves John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."

[@michellesmith5436]

Wouldn't there be digging and DNA testing of every potential site so some hero could say found him he's here told ya? Or is that not permitted by law?

[@sburns2421]

DNA sequence compared to what? Unless we had bones from his mother's side that we knew beyond a shadow of a doubt were related to him this is no way to prove anything. You could take ossuaries found in a single tomb and show perhaps that they were related to each other, but that itself doesn't show Jesus was any of them. Now to you point, if you could extract DNA from the Shroud of Turin and match that to DNA from bones dated to first century that would be amazing.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@educatingwithwisdom7770]

In every instance that a Mary is mentioned, other than Mary Magdala, it is mother of James at the tomb or cross. If they had meant to say Jesus's mother ( as they have elsewhere), and the issue is surrounding a crucifiction or going to the tomb to look after the body, they would have said, Mary, Jesus's mother. You know this Dr. Tabor...Just as the name "Mary" was popular, so were James/Jacob, Simon, and just as Mary M. was confounded throughout the NT, deliberately so, there would be absolutely no reason to not be explicit, as the God tells us to be. Everyone would expect, that if Jesus's mother were still alive and could, that she would go to the Cross and tomb, and would expect this explicit statement (only Satan and his aids so hide). Every normal person would say that Jesus's mother Mary was there and name her as such...Nothing about Jesus's mother is explicit in John; she is never named...As well, why would Jesus have spend the whole week at Mary, Martha, and Lazaru's. Lazaru was dead for days before Jesus arrives into Jerusalem, or else he has been in Jeruselam and away for days. If he had been with them for days, they would be mentioned at the Cross, or tomb, last supper (Jesus loved him L.)...Nothing!

[@sunshine_schleichs]

I wonder if there were 3 sightings of angels. 1. When the women go to the tomb and fall down to the floor. The angel reminds them of Jesus' words and they leave not knowing where Jesus was. 2. When Peter, John, and Mary had come back to the tomb and Mary was left alone. Mary sees angels and Jesus. 3. When Mary returns after seeing Jesus and women come with her. They are invited to inspect the tomb where he had been. (Matthew and Mark) The first sighting set the women on course to go get the disciples. The second sighting is when some disciples check out the scene. The third sighting is when women come back after Mary's report of Jesus. Matthew's angel says the same thing as Mark's angel, but in Matthew the Greek says the women leave with GREAT JOY. They run into Jesus on their way back. If these accounts are the first angel the women run into, why would Mary run and tell Peter she didn't know where Jesus was? She wouldn't have great joy. Think about it. Matthew and Mark might just be jumping to the end of the resurrection and leaving out all the drama of Luke and John.

[@djpodesta]

24-72 hours after death - the internal organs decompose. 3-5 days after death - the body starts to bloat and blood-containing foam leaks from the mouth and nose. Could the body have been properly anointed for a correct burial?

[@michaelpickett1460]

Remember, that's why mary was headed to the tomb so early..to finish preparing the body.

[@HistoryandReviews]

Are you a medical expert I have a serious question

[@HistoryandReviews]

@@michaelpickett1460 remember one account says the tomb was rolled away BEFORE she got there, another account says SHE WITNESSED it being rolled away. Contradiction

[@djpodesta]

@@HistoryandReviews It depends upon your question. I wouldn’t even think about answering any personal medical issues over the internet.

[@djpodesta]

@@michaelpickett1460 There is so much conjecture and supposing around the whole story… which cannot be physically proved one way or the other. You could have said that God may have kept Jesus’ body in such a state that it could have been anointed correctly if the body were not risen. Alternatively, you could have said that Mary didn’t have any way of knowing the biological rate of decay. That is why we take the whole story of redemption on faith, rather than trying to bend the scriptures to prove something that we don’t have any way of actually knowing… or are able to fully explain as fact… unless God took you back in time to show you precisely what happened… or came to you to explain everything of course.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@organicman6690]

Funny how those "hoaxers" seemed to willingly die for a "fake" religion. In fact, the entire Bible is a masterpiece of either God- inspired prophecy, or ; as you try to promote, a masterfully written fictional novel. Anybody who diligently studies the Book from cover to cover can be amazed at it's precision. The science is there. It's just the interpretation that is faulty.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

The doctrine that Jesus was seated at the right hand of the Father wasn't all that far off into the future. Stephen, before he was stoned to death (Acts 7) tells of seeing Jesus at the right hand of God: Acts 7:55-56 - But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. It's estimated that this was within the first few years of Jesus' ascension.

[@paullkaplan4140]

The first gospel Mark doesn't say Jesus mother was at the execution or buriel, in fact the gospel says she thought he was insane. If she had been made pregnant by God she would have known what his mission was.

[@kamion53]

"......jesus was dead by 3 pm on thursday....." that is a novel approach, tradition has it that he died at the night hour at the day before shabbath. When he died a day before the relatives would had a whole day and a night to prepare a burial. but obvious tradition, church and gospel have it wrong. Also I wonder that they needed more then three hours for a burial as sunset was about at 6 PM or a little later.

[@josephdemirbas1636]

Y lie about Jesus Jesus died for us

[@cipherklosenuf9242]

But did not leave an account of his life or it is lost to history. We have copies of remnants written on papyrus in a language Jesus likely didn’t speak. We have clay tablets far older, stone engravings and prehistoric cave paintings. Why don’t we have more complete and reliable primary sources about this event? We don’t know, we may only know that we have what we have.

[@serapheum]

Others were raised from the dead in TaNaK. Also, your videos have way too many adds...

[@dadedowuh]

I'm sure Jesus was someone who didn't want to be a burden for anyone, ever.

[@ohfft]

Is there any evidence a dead body could have been laid in the talpiot tomb before being put in its bone box?

[@JacquesMare]

Yes, it was standard practice at the time and even today in places like Greece.

[@HandofOmega]

There's a Rabbi who shows up in my recommendations, talking against the Christian story; in one of his videos, he claims that the story is wrong because the gospels get the burial details all wrong, that anointing dead bodies with spices is nowhere in the Jewish Law or customs, and that, even if that were a thing, that women would not have handled the dead bodies of men. Is he correct?

[@JacquesMare]

Those are not the only details the gospels got wrong. The fact that there are so many versions of the resurrection clearly contradicting one another, is enough proof that this whole tale was concocted to save the messianic message of Jesus and continue the profitability of the business that gave rise to the super-rich denominations we see today.

[@termination9353]

- The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@peterhook2258]

Yeah, so many differences. We need to learn how to source our info from credible scholars..yep.

[@termination9353]

I'm a Rabbi - and while there is no law ordaining such a burial - it is not forbidden either. And it was very much the custom of HELLINIZED Jewry to do as the Greek culture did, especially if it is not Torah forbidden. Jesus was not a sacrifice. It was a brilliant tactical legal maneuver. Jesus was announced as king of Israel in that choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Quickly said, Pilot dressed Jesus up as King, Pilot presented Jesus to the Sanhedrin and high priest among the crowd as "their King". Told the crowd to choose to crucify "their King" or Barabbas. The Saducees and High Priest chose "their king" Jesus to be crucified and instigated the Jewish crowd to choose "their King" to be crucified..... and so the Priesthood anointed Jesus as their king in order for him to be executed. And Pilat published this fact above Jesus head at a time when Jerusalem was most crowded of Jews from all over the realm. What this accomplished was to legalize according to Torah law Jesus' amended covenant and make irrelevant all burdensome Talmudic rules. I think Jesus and Pilat planned it together. Neet trick on the Sanhedrin huh.

[@JacquesMare]

@@termination9353 source?

[@fartamayo]

My take is that, where Jesus is buried is exactly where Lazarus was buried too, In Bethany.. near the house of Mariamne and Martha of Bethany. And that tomb is exactly the same as the Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. All of these were just a family affair.

[@HistoryandReviews]

Lazarus never existed

[@fartamayo]

@@HistoryandReviews oh i see… show facts

[@HistoryandReviews]

@@fartamayo mentioned in one Gospel, name ripped from Luke. John is not a synoptic Gospel. John is not a historical Gospel. John has a completely different Jesus from the synoptics

[@fartamayo]

@@HistoryandReviews please read the gospels again

[@HistoryandReviews]

@@fartamayo read my above response AGAIN

[@geralddoyle5131]

Nice try Spin Doctor!

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

Mark's gospel was written well before 70 A.D. and I have proven this over and over. James Tabor doesn't know half the New Testament and the half that he does know, he doesn't believe.

[@jonfox8010]

Please show your evidence for your premise

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@jonfox8010 - The proof is in the text itself. Can you name a single prophecy that the New Testament writers do not exploit? In John 21, the writer exploits Peter's martyrdom. That's pretty minor compared to the destruction of the Temple, don't you think? Why would the authors of the gospels cite the event with taking a victory lap? But there is none of that in any of them. Not even a single, "See, I told you so."

[@xifangyangren9997]

Jesus’ body faded away like Yoda and Luke’s, and then reappeared as a force ghost in Jerusalem and Galilee.

[@tombaesl9875]

Im sorry but your revisionist history does not jive with my faith. To those who believe , no proof is necessary. To those who do not, no proof will suffice.

[@afwalker1921]

The rumor at the time was that Jesus' father was in Pantera. I suspect it was Dimebag Darrell...

[@termination9353]

tabor is way wrong - The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@peterhook2258]

His dad was probably Joseph, this is most likely imo but hey, who knows.

[@sburns2421]

@@termination9353 Just because you keep copying and pasting this same drivel over and over in the same video does not make it any more credible.

[@termination9353]

@@sburns2421 My intent is to discuss it and show its credibility. Parable of the Sower of the Field.

[@fartamayo]

If Jesus was a Rabbi, there is big probability that his father is also a Rabbi, and a big probability too that Jesus might have a son. It is a generational priesthood of Levi. It is a big probability too that Jesus real father is a brother of Joseph, his mother Mary’s husband. Its all a family affair based on Mosaic Law.

[@Christopherurich33]

Wonder if they planted trees where the crosses of those crucified along the roads

[@davekearney1944]

It would be a heavily forested area, if they planted a tree for every Jewish rebel crucified outside of the city walls.

[@termination9353]

it's 20 ft underground with a parking lot paved atop.

[@jperez7893]

this goes against the stated fact that the tomb was guarded and stamped with the seals of the high priest or of pilate. the high priest pre-empted the resurrection from happening by having the soldiers assigned to it by pilate to guard the tomb. the gardener would have to fight off several men with swords and spears before he can mess around with the sealed tomb

[@davekearney1944]

That's a "stated fact" only in Matthew's gospel. Paul and the others were either unaware of it, or found it didnt suit their narratives.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@jperez7893]

@@termination9353 stop reading the fiction of dan brown

[@termination9353]

@@jperez7893 It's all straight from the Gospel narrative starting with John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."

[@jperez7893]

@@termination9353 yes the beloved disciple is Lazarus. The gospel of john was written on 63 or 64 and revelation was written before 68 before the death of nero in june of 68

[@TheodorReik]

My inclination, based upon the somewhat ragged gospel accounts, would be to think the body had indeed been stolen. The account given here is tidy and rational, and I’m all for tidiness and rationality. But then I run headlong into the Shroud of Turin. There is no way it’s a forgery. They finally released the data from the carbon tests and it turned out to have a three-sigma deviation between the tested samples, which would normally invalidate it, but there is a very interesting anomaly: the tests could be accurate, and the dates could be wrong. The earliest date is from the sample closest to the edge; as you move inward the dates become more recent in a linear progression. That is interesting because the only explanation of the image modern science can come up with, after decades of investigation, is that the image had to have been created by a release of energy--such as would have disrupted the carbon-14 ratios. The nearer the body, the more energy. When you put together all the evidence, including correspondences with the Sudarium of Oviedo, pollen samples, dirt samples, the anatomical accuracy of the crucifixion depicted, the impossibility of its having been painted or scorched into the fabric, and so on, the evidence really does seem overwhelming that the body of Jesus did something like decompose into photons. Personally, I do not identify as Christian because I do not believe Jesus was God Incarnate, and in many respects I would be happier with something like the rational explanation given here, but the thing about reality is that it doesn’t give a damn whether you are happy with it. So I have to go with the idea that the burial shroud was itself the original gospel preached to the disciples, a token left behind that, yes, he really did it.

[@HistoryandReviews]

It has been proven fake 4 years ago dude STOP

[@nightspore4850]

@@HistoryandReviews Fine. If it’s a fake, it’s a fake. Give me a reference to what you are talking about and I will look it up immediately. I am currently unaware of any such proof. In fact, many recent findings continue to make the case for authenticity. The biggest deal is the image depth on the cloth and its astonishing uniformity. Other than some form of ionizing radiation there seems to be no explanation. Honestly, if you’ve got something to the contrary I really will look into it.

[@geoattoronto]

The body was absent because of the glorious power of Jesus now in spirit form. Jesus dematerializes his body so the corpse is gone. He now can appear at will behind closed doors or where he is needed. He is resurrected not as a corpse but as a glorified spirit like Elijah and Moses on he mount of transfiguration.

[@geoattoronto]

Agreed. He did it when he de materialized his body.

[@nightspore4850]

@@geoattoronto I simply do not see any other reasonable conclusion to be drawn from what I take to be the overwhelming evidence of the Shroud. Some people, even some who are inclined to regard the Shroud as authentic, want to maintain a kind of perpetual scepticism, which I find unreasonable. There is enough forensic evidence on the Shroud to hang a dozen men and at some point that just needs to be acknowledged. You took my point correctly, however, that the image on the Shroud is not of resurrection but decomposition. Obviously the two are related. If you decompose into photons, i.e. into primal energy, then it is hardly much of a leap to talk about resurrection into a spiritual form, whatever that means. The Shroud image is still of a dead human body, but of a dead human body undergoing an astonishing transformation. Without it, I would be inclined, simply from the gospel accounts, to think the body of Jesus had been stolen. With it, however, that conclusion is simply untenable. I think of the first disciples on the first Easter morning looking at that image in an empty tomb and saying to themselves, “Oh my God, he really did it!”

[@DrMARDOC]

Any meaningful valid insights on The Shroud of Turin? Something NEW /REAL?

[@elmonixon4392]

I love Dr Tabor. About all I can comment regarding this fantastical Taborian Fabrication is that it ain't worth commenting on.

[@sburns2421]

You have an interesting way of being disinterested.

[@abdar-rahman6965]

Disagreed - not true at all. When Jesus was removed from Cross, he was not dead but unconscious and later he was resuscitated, and this has been said by several top Bible scholars too

[@harryhagman6063]

WRONG

[@respektmyname15]

CORRECT

[@khazak-yaohgad5662]

All lies!

[@sunshine_schleichs]

Wouldn't Jesus be crucified to the east like the sacrifice was back in the times of Moses and the Tabernacle? That would put Jesus on the Mount of Olives. The Hebrew word for head or summit is rosh. Couldn't the summit of Mt. of Olives be the "head" or place of the "skull"? If the tomb did belong to Joseph, couldn't that garden be in Arimathaea? Arimathaea is Ramah. Couldn't it be the hometown of Samuel the prophet? Could Jesus have died and resurected in Ramah of Mt. Ephraim, which is also Mt. of Olives? I wish I could have a long talk with you Dr. Tabor.

[@caman171]

this is the biggest crock of crap ive EVER watched! tabor says "No man can be born without a human father and NO man can rise from the dead" what??? even if u refuse to believe the gospel and totally reject Jesus, the "first" man (adam) had no earthly father. jewish prophets raised people from the dead long before Jesus. and if Jesus was indeed God in human flesh, why would he need a human father if he created all flesh to begin with? reject Jesus if u want, but dont turn around and use the gospel writers stories for "clues" or facts. if Jesus did not rise from the dead, u must reject ALL of what they say. a liar cannot be trusted in anything. so wither accept that Jesus is who the gospels say he was, or reject it all and move on

[@gpwil3847]

I have to give the most weight to those who were present, and witnessed what actually happened and then were willing to put their lives at risk for their faith that grew and spread all over the world. Speculation based on more or less or even more speculative and tattered evidence and reasoning becomes a personal fiction because it is based on our own biased hunch or guess work. You can make of it what you want to see instead of what actually was. I’d be more cautious If I were you. Many tend to malign the motives of people who may have just been sincere and above board rather than evil.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

I like James Tabor's stories. I also like Ancient Aliens on the History Channel. Stuff like this interests me. (James was the disciple Jesus loved??? Puh-lease.)

[@Jd-808]

Dr Tabor is pretty mainstream on most things, those 2 aren’t equivalent at all

[@sburns2421]

Many scholars contend James was his brother.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@sburns2421 - Ha! Yeah. The entire New Testament says that James was the brother of Jesus. After the Apostles all left Jerusalem, James seems to have taken over the church. He kinda became pope of that dumpster fire.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@Jd-808 - Much of James Tabor theory is pure speculation. And the fact that he contradicts the very word of God that he claims to "explain" proves my point. "The gospels were written in the 20th century." (or whatever poppycock he wants to have us believe) That theory simply ignores the very text of the New Testament. How are you supposed to take this guy seriously?

[@sburns2421]

Please keep explaining your position

[@dodo1opps]

Iron age middle eastern mythology

[@chipious9736]

Occam’s razor dictates his body was thrown in a ditch. Stories can say anything.

[@Nexus-jg7ev]

I'd like to think so too. It is true that this was the usual way Romans did crucifixion but then we also have information from Jospehus that it was a custom to take the crucified down and bury them before sunset. How much we can trust this account I don't really know. How necessary was the empty tomb for Jesus' disciples to come to believe in resurrection I really don't know either. I am a skeptic too but I am rather willing to grant that there was a tomb that was found empty but a resurrected corpse is far from the only explanation for it. It can be frustrating to present alternative hypothesis to Christians because they believe everything in the text and the text is built to be as fantastic and extraordinary that it makes generally more plausible alternative explanations seem less plausible than an actual miracle. If Christians think that all the realistic physical appearances and even Jesus' 40-day stay, the appearances to the 500, etc. are genuine, it is very difficult to persuade them in, say, hallucinatory experiences if we can't persuasively reduce the facts (rather claims) to something more modest. Regarding the tomb, I think that it is historical and the body was found missing but in my opinion it was either moved or stolen by grave robbers. Now if Christians really believe Mathew about the guardsat the tomb, things get frustrating again. The New Testament is just a pile of apologetic crap. As for the appearances, here I'm rather clueless. I have no idea who Jesus really appeared to, where and when because the accounts are contradictory but Luke and John do seem to embellish a lot. If we go to Paul's creed, we get yet another perspective. First to witness the 'risen Jesus' was Peter, then the twelve (although there were only eleven of them left during Jesus' appearances), then 500 brethren (interesting wording with brethren - if Paul means followers of Jesus then that's anachronistic because the early Church was founded after Jesus' alleged ascension and only had about 120 members), then to James (not sure if James was a skeptic or actually a disciple as Dr Tabor suggests), then to all apostles (if the disciples are the apostles, isn't this an unnecessary repetition?) and lastly to Paul who merely had a vision caused by what was probably an epileptic seizure or a heatstroke that made him hear voices. I do not think that Mary Magdalene's experiences are well attested across the gospels to consider her the first 'witness' but maybe we can say that Mary and Peter had some apparitions first and then persuaded the rest of the disciples and even James. As for the 500, I'm clueless. Paul says that this information was given to him, so it might be just a hearsay from someone else, I doubt that he interviewed 500 people. Whether it is from Peter or James with whom he allegedly conversed in Jerusalem to get that information about the 500, there is no way to know. As for the 40-day stay of Jesus, I think that the author of Luke makes too much stuff up to be trusted for such a ridiculous claim in Acts (Luke and Acts have the same author). So, as a skeptic I am fine with the empty tomb but I am not sure how far I can go with the 'appearances'. Certainly, I can't grant them all because taken all together they would be too extraordinary to be mere visions. So, I am discarding most of them as fictional otherwise my case gets harder to defend. What are your thoughts?

[@chipious9736]

@@Nexus-jg7ev My thoughts are that the Romans crucified tens of thousands of people before Jesus and tens of thousands after. A vast majority of them were simply thrown in a ditch. The hundreds of years of stories and theories that came after is why we have this back and forth with all various tales that are written. Stories that tend to fill in the spaces of the pervious story when looked at chronologically. Even now with video and computers people still believe and weave fantastical conspiracies. Why I’m I supposed to believe that’s just a recent phenomenon?

[@Jd-808]

Not how Occam’s razor works

[@chipious9736]

@@Jd-808 So the simplest explanation is the best one doesn’t cut it?

[@Jd-808]

@@chipious9736 How is that the simplest explanation? Just because a claim isn’t statistically the most probable, doesn’t mean it should be considered untrue. Statistically improbable events happen all the time and it is plausible that they were able to bury Jesus. By that logic we should presume any claim that a male was born is false since a female birth is more probable. And if the logic is that “Mark made it up” is a simpler and therefore best explanation, by that logic all historical written historical claims without physical evidence should be considered made up. To say “Mark wrote about a tomb because there was a tomb” is a perfectly simple explanation. Mark even provides a perfectly plausible explanation for how the body was acquired. And Mark does not seem interested in apologetic arguments. He doesn’t even verify the claim of resurrection. I am not saying it is a historical fact, as I have a lot of respect for Ehrman and Crossan who argue against it, but it isn’t a naive or fallacious claim.

[@theonlyway5298]

James Tabor's videos are very interesting, but we should bear in mind that he is only one of many who have tried to understand these events and he may have insights to only some of these things but not others... For instance, at 12:49 he states his dating of the writing of the gospels of Matthew, Luke and John as being "forty to seventy years after the death of Jesus, by authors who were not original witnesses..." >> ....while neither Matthew's nor Luke's gospels state in them that they are eye witnesses of the events, John's gospel states that the gospel that was written, was founded upon the eye witness testimony of the author. While it is easy for someone in the 21st century to dismiss John's eye witness testimony as 'false', it requires far more than either prejudice or suspicion to dismiss its contents as eye witness testimony. While this has been the subject of controversy over a long period of time, I don't believe there is the necessary proof available to make the conclusion that the gospel is not based upon an eye witness testimony, even if it required others to physically write it, or even revise it. Essentially the author of John's gospel maintains that the gospel is based upon eye witness testimony of a companion of Jesus and that this witness was very close to Jesus. The passing descriptions of this person suggest that he was in fact, very young when Jesus was alive and thus may have survived the original disciples by some period of time. While a skeptic may dismiss what is written in John's gospel because it is convenient to presume that whoever wrote it had no conscience about lying (while at the same time simultaneously explaining the most spiritually transcendent ideas of holiness!), for those of us who have found the 'new birth' described in John chapter 3, to be a literal and powerful experience, the concept that the author 'lied' is completely implausible. I had the new birth as a powerful tangible experience that I will never, ever forget for the rest of my life. It was only subsequently that I looked in the Bible and discovered exactly what it was and what had happened to me - and I was extremely shocked!! Thus the gospel is more than words, for those who have experienced what is described in it!

[@termination9353]

Tabor is WAY wrong. - Jesus was announced as king of Israel in that choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Quickly said, Pilot dressed Jesus up as King, Pilot presented Jesus to the Sanhedrin and high priest among the crowd as "their King". Told the crowd to choose to crucify "their King" or Barabbas. The Saducees and High Priest chose "their king" Jesus to be crucified and instigated the Jewish crowd to choose "their King" to be crucified..... and so the Priesthood anointed Jesus as their king in order for him to be executed. And Pilat published this fact above Jesus head at a time when Jerusalem was most crowded of Jews from all over the realm. What this accomplished was to legalize according to Torah law Jesus' amended covenant and make irrelevant all burdensome Talmudic rules. I think Jesus and Pilat planned it together. Neet trick on the Sanhedrin huh.

[@sburns2421]

John's narrative was written about 95-100 AD. An eye witness would have been very old indeed at that time. It was also written in Greek not the native language of the Apostle John, but perhaps he told it to a learned scribe. It is also the most fantastical and anti-Jewish (pro-Gentile if you will) of the Gospels. The Apostle John was a devout Jew first before he ever knew Jesus, and even after the crucifixion the Cult of Jesus for lack of a better term was a JEWISH faction, at least until the marketing skill of Paul arrived on the scene around 55 AD. It is therefore highly unlikely that the actual Apostle John dictated this, and even less likely that it is a 100% accurate historical record of what transpired. Call it embellishment, call it propaganda, call it what you will, but for me personally it is the least believable of the four, starting with the claim it was from John himself.

[@theonlyway5298]

@@peterhook2258 re: ('"based upon" meaning it was not eyewitness'): From my perspective it means it is 'eye witness testimony'. It is the only gospel that states this and I would suggest that it does this because the person who is the source of the information, is none other than a companion of Jesus. It would seem that the gospel was written with the assistance of others and the 'author/eye witness' may well have been dictating crucial parts of it, if not all of it. This makes perfect sense, because if the author was old and in poor health, he may not have been physically capable of writing it himself. If the author was actually the disciple Thomas, as has been suggested by one researcher, then his testimony is crucial particularly in identifying the resurrected Jesus, when he put his hands in his wounds. re: "based on is not the same as eyewitness, respectfully." : I disagree on that. What it means is that it crucially contains accounts that are eye witness testimony, whereas the other gospels do not make this claim. re: "Also its not about lying": It would be 'lying' to say that it has eye witness testimony from the author, if in fact it was not eye witness testimony - this is why John's gospel specifically states that it is true eye witness testimony as distinct from the other gospels. *John 21:24 "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true."*

[@theonlyway5298]

@@sburns2421 re: "John's narrative was written about 95-100 AD" > How do you know? In what way can you be sure of this? re: "An eye witness would have been very old indeed at that time" > Is there a problem with someone being old? re: "It was also written in Greek not the native language of the Apostle John, but perhaps he told it to a learned scribe." > Arguably, Greek was at that time the common language being used. Recent archaeological discoveries of synagogues, including a 1st century synagogue in Jerusalem, with Greek inscriptions of its benefactors, provides ample evidence together with the use of the Septuagint, that from Jerusalem to Galilee, Greek was widely used by the inhabiting Jews, alongside Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin (hence the inscription put on Jesus's cross). Scribes were widely used in the 1st century. re: "It is also the most fantastical and anti-Jewish (pro-Gentile if you will) of the Gospels." >> That isn't my reading of it. What makes you say that? I haven't seen any indications of it being 'anti-Jewish' at all - quite the opposite. re: "The Apostle John was a devout Jew first before he ever knew Jesus, and even after the crucifixion the Cult of Jesus for lack of a better term was a JEWISH faction, at least until the marketing skill of Paul arrived on the scene around 55 AD." >> Jesus was JEWISH also, as were all the disciples and earliest believers, JEWISH....look this is common knowledge and hardly needs stating. Paul also was JEWISH and never became Gentile. re: "Paul arrived on the scene around 55 AD." >> Paul didn't "arrive on the scene" in AD 55. As a devout Jew persecuting Jewish believers in Jesus, he was compelled against his choice to believe in and follow Jesus and this occurred approximately 3 years after Jesus was crucified...so approximately AD 33-36. The earliest *surviving* writings we have from Paul have been dated to approximately AD 49, approximately 20 years after the crucifixion. From 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 and Galatians 1 and 2, we learn that he met Peter, James and John, receiving their personal testimonies and experience of Jesus. re: "It is therefore highly unlikely that the actual Apostle John dictated this, and even less likely that it is a 100% accurate historical record of what transpired" >> My thoughts are that it is Thomas who is the author of this gospel, but even if it was a John, I don't have reason to claim as you do that: "even less likely that it is a 100% accurate historical record of what transpired". I guess, prejudice may lead to thinking with that kind of skepticism. re: "Call it embellishment, call it propaganda, call it what you will, but for me personally it is the least believable of the four, starting with the claim it was from John himself." >> I don't call it embellishment or propaganda, but I do call it a positive presentation of the message of Jesus for us to receive, so that we may believe in Jesus and know important things that are personally from him. Regarding the authorship being a John, I tend to lean on it being Thomas, not John, though I recognise the tradition of it being a John.

[@peterhook2258]

@@theonlyway5298 Look I understand what your saying however there is a problem in presenting that a scholar is wrong in using a term like eyewitness. Your perspective is fine but in academics "eyewitness account" means the author was the eyewitness. So its okay to say we have record that one of the authors was writing for or infers he may be an eyewitness. Someone could leave your comment thinking...there was an eyewitness "account" meaning the eyewitness wrote it..which its not at all clear they did and that is a big deal in scholarship. No one is saying no one witnessed the events. And your lie vs true comment, I get you however I do not feel you are familiar with the style I spoke about in pseudepigrapha when the person writing it is not even the author...and claims they are..I really don't think you are familiar with this type of presentation and can't get over the fact that it was okay and not considered lying. For instance...in churches today it can be said...Wendy saw her grandson healed from cancer...and I know this is true. That is not an eyewitness account in academics. If Wendy wrote My grandson was healed, I saw it and I know it is true..that ie eyewitness account. hope this helps

[@robertbrown5536]

Jesus was indeed dead, but there was one woman unnamed that was in the tomb when they brought him in and she made 17 attempts to bring him back to life. And finally he was brought back by the presence of God with her work. For about 6 months he was hitting the catacombs under the city because there was still a price on his head. And then the young lady that had protected him that night and another took him to India. And where he was finally buried in India if they ever opened his tomb they will find three books that he wrote trying to explain everything. I don't know how much of it was about the events in Jerusalem or how much was about his visions of the future. It took him 20 years to get his strength back. Jesus was a man, the son of man, created by the hand of God and divine by his creation. The son of God as mankind is the son of God. He came to teach mankind with their birthright truly was he didn't claim to be the Messiah cuz he knew that was a future yet to be.

[@spankflaps1365]

(Captain Hindsight) They shoulda had better mortuary security, or the Romans should have cremated the body. Then it would’ve been case closed.

[@peterhook2258]

I highly doubt it. Teachers like that go down in history wo raising from the dead. Many esoteric Jewish rabbis are studied still today and are infamous for their knowledge on the mystical aspects of Judaism.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.