In the first century and indeed the years before, "tombs" were expensive. Only the very rich could afford them. "Criminals" were denied "tombs" as being unfit for a proper burial.
In the case of jesus, a tomb is highly unlikely. Supposedly jesus was a begger that relied on handouts to survive. All his disciples were beggars as well renouncing their jobs to follow the hobo jesus.
When and if jesus was arrested he was destitute. The Romans being the highly efficient government that they were would not have paid for a tomb. The practice of the time was to execute the criminal and either leave them on a cross or dump them in a mass grave or even burn them in a mass funeral pyre. No record exists of executed criminals being returned to family members in all the Roman records. In fact, there is no criminal record of jesus. No trial record, no arrest record, no execution record. That is significant because Romans were obsessive about chronicling everything that the government every official action.
So why are christians so insistent that jesus was arrested by the Romans, tried by the Romans, executed by the Romans, given to the family by the Romans, and buried in a tomb? It is simply impossible without any Roman record of such an event and goes against everything that the Romans did at the time.
Spartacus was a famous slave that led a rebellion. He was eventually defeated and crucified. His body was left to rot. His remains vanished or were just forgotten after a few years. There are extensive records of this by the Romans. Indeed all of the slave rebels that were executed were chronicled by the Romans. That numbers into the tens of thousands. So why would the Romans just forget recording ANYTHING about jesus? The only answer is that it just didn't happen. Did all the hundreds of scribes suddenly have writers cramp? No, the fact is the Romans would have recorded the events in detail and they have no records of such an event. There aren't even jewish records. Only testimony that appears over 300 years after the supposed event.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
There may be some exceptions to the practice of leaving the bodies on the cross. I recently read an article on crucifixion. A skeleton was found in a wealthy families tomb. A young man who had been crucified. Ghastly way to die. The Romans would nail your heel bones to the sides of the posts. The nail would be started through a block of wood which would keep the victim from pulling their heel off the nail. That is how they knew this young rich man was crucified. The nail had bent and could not be removed. Can you imagine the pain of having a nail hammered through the sides of your heel? Yikes. But mykcob4 is correct. Most were left to rot and be torn apart by scavengers. The young man obviously had enough wealthy connections to be allowed a burial but not enough to avoid an execution.
@Chimp3: "A skeleton was found in a wealthy families tomb.I remember "
I read something about that too. I think that was the first and only skeleton found so far with clear evidence of crucifixion. The Romans crucified many thousands of people throughout their empire. If they'd been in the habit of giving the victims back to their families, there should be a lot more bones with holes through them or nails embedded.
Crucifixion was meant to be the most painful, shameful, horrible death. It commonly took 2-3 days for the victims to die, and the punishment was continued even after death by leaving the victims exposed. The Jesus crucifixion story is very odd.
@Algebe: I just reread the article. Just search "crucifixion" on wikipedia. You are correct, this is the only ancient remain found with evidence of crucifixion. His name was Jehohanan. Found in an area of Jerusalem named Giv'at ha - Mivtar. No other remains have been found. This was an anomoly. Wonder what that rich kid did? Fuck the Governors daughter? Wife?
But just out if curiosity, do records of the type you are describing, exist for any human being of that time period ?
I always wonder about this kind of stuff, and the historians who dig this crap up ?
I mean, where was this stuff saved / stored, that "any" hard core irrefutable evidence could be found now ?
Everytime I hear about stuff like this, either for, or against the possibility of the biblical Jesus ever existing, I find all of this talk just as unbelievable as I do the bible itself.
Amazing how ordinary and routine crucixion has been throught history as a means of execution. There are photographs of crucifixion victims. The Japanese used it in the 20th century. The Turks crucified Armenians. What is so special about Jesus?
@Chimp3: "Amazing how ordinary and routine crucixion has been throught history"
If you need a memorable logo for your religion, crucifixion is the way to go. The cross is simple and can be reproduced in wood, gold, silver, etc. It can be emblazoned on shields, and its shape is very similar to that of a Crusader-era sword. Imagine going into battle with a fish on your shield, or trying to do the sign of a fish with your hand as you kneel in front of a statue of Jesus on the fish.
In the history of marketing, the cross is right up there with the golden arches, the Coca-Cola contour bottle, and the Mercedes hub ornament.
Imagine Jesus returning and seeing all these Christians waving crucifixes at him! Retreat!!!!
"...'tombs' were expensive. Only the very rich could afford them. 'Criminals' were denied 'tombs' as being unfit for a proper burial. In the case of jesus, a tomb is highly unlikely. Supposedly jesus was a begger that relied on handouts to survive. All his disciples were beggars as well renouncing their jobs to follow the hobo jesus."
Did you not read the book? It literally tells you how He got the tomb
I assume you are referring to John19:38-42? A very odd passage. It refers to "According to Jewish burial rites". John(if he ever existed as a single individual) was Jewish, everyone who became christian first had to become Jewish so, according to my own studies and those much more learned than I; this passage had to have been written at least 150 years later and added in to the supposed testimony of John. There was no reason for a contemporary account to mention the "jewish rites" specifically unless it was written and added in for the benefit of a gentile audience hundreds of years after..
Probably added in by Polycarps followers or even later.
So Mykcob's call of BS stands for now.
"As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away." (Matt 27:57-)
So Matthew and John directly contradict? Matthew says it belonged to Joseph of Arimethea and John says it was an empty tomb brand new that was empty and unattended due to a Jewish festival.
In an inerrant bible which is the true account? Or are they both inserts into a previous story/myth?
Looks like Mykob's call still stands...
"Matthew says it belonged to Joseph of Arimethea and John says it was an empty tomb brand new that was empty and unattended..."
You right. That's definitely a contradiction if I've ever seen one. I have no clue how a tomb can be empty, and belong to someone at the same time.
John is quite specific so your "sarcasm" is lost. It just displays some ignorance of the customs of the time.
The tomb was new built for the jewish festival of preparation.* If so it was a tomb for multiple occupance, a community thing as was common just before that festival. It provided for the devout that were penurious and unlikely to be buried in their own area. They were not guarded unlike the tombs of the rich which were often robbed for the cloths and herbs as well as death goods left in the burial.
Joseph of Arimithea was a very wealthy and influential individual,and, as opposed to tradition ( Church of the holy Sepulchre) it is much more likely that he would have had a somewhat splendid affair contructed after his death, and, more likely in Arimithea, the place of his birth and where his family sepulchre would have been located.
Records exist of the wealthy being transferred in large "olive oil" jars from all over the known world to be buried in their family area. Again the likelihood of the events happening as described by John or by Matthew are unlikely in that time and context..
Mykcob's analysis stands. Unless of course you can introduce some 3rd party evidence written at the time?
* There several Festival feasts of Prepartion in the Jewish calendar this one is specific to the Passover ritual the festival to give thanks to YHWH where acts of charity and feasting afterwards were considered de rigeur in society at the time.
Nope, you win.
@John: Literally literally means in written form , correct?
Tombs were expensive - Yes
Jesus was poor - Not if he had carpenter skills. He was very capable of earning a living.
Roman Execution on a cross: The entire cross thing is in question. Early Christian texts do not mention a cross but a pole or a tree. The cross appears to be a Roman Christian invention and it was used to encourage the impression of a suffering death,.
Execution missing records: A non-issue. Yes Romans kept records. Records were lost and the Romans were not as efficient as all that.
Christians are insistent about the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus because the Bible tells them this is what happened. They regard the text as a book of history and not the mythology for what it is.
If Jesus was crucified; highly unlikely - again because early records attest to a different death. His corps would have been left on the pole to rot. Part of the embarrassment of crucifixion was to NOT have a burial.
Using the crucifixion as an argument for Roman record keeping is not so conclusive. Instead you might mention things like "Palm Sunday" The Romans never noticed it. The world thrown into darkness at the crucifixion. "No one anywhere in the world noticed it." Zombies walking the streets. "No one noticed." There are many events that clearly demonstrate the bible is myth, Jesus, if he was crucified at all, was certainly not crucified in the manor described by the Bible. It is not a history book.
These abundant Biblical and Historical references (or lack of references) leave us with reasonable doubt that Jesus was not real, or at the very least, just a normal person who was the subject of numerous fantasy stories. At this point in time, you will never prove that Jesus was not real. The position untenable should probably be avoided as a stated truth. In support of the atheist position is is sufficient to just ask for the evidence and then note that it is sufficiently poor to warrant belief.
@ Cognos.
"Jesus was poor" Actually, not. Carpenters were amongst the elite of the middle Eastern Craftsmen at the times we are considering. The scarcity of trees then in the area (as now) caused all the wood to be imported. Joseph would have stocks of expensive woods including camphor, sandalwood, oaks, etc. Jesus and his siblings would have been middle class tradesmen.
The fisherman Peter may well have been coarse in his habits and direct in his speech but again fishing boats and licences to fish, as now were at a premium in those days. Fishing Boats cost the equivalent of some 900,000 dollars to build, same as nowadays in the WA cray industry. So Peter was a horny handed sailor but he had a few bob.. The rest of the assorted mob following Jesus were all middle class. Not a poor boy amongst them.
The poor/outcasts/swine herders were mostly illiterate and would never have been listened to, they would have been turned away with contempt and violence much like the Eta in Japan even nowadays.
Joseph of Arimethea ( A very wealthy trader and great friend of the Romans, he owned trading houses all over present day Europe and has been recorded as trading in tin from Cornwall in Britain) was Jesus' uncle so we are led to believe, and there are theories that if Mathews account is partially true then Jesus body could well have been ransomed by Joseph of A, and a cover up tale to placate his followers invented. Jesus then recovered, saw his friends, and then buggered off with Mary Magdalene and his Mum to live quietly in obscurity. A much more likely tale.
Well the body of Jesus was given to a wealthy Sadducee Joseph Of Arimathea Matthew chapter 27 verse57 and 58. This was outside of the usual custom here. Evidently Pilate decided to grant the request rather then leave the body up on the cross for days or put it in a mass grave.
See above, Johns account directly contradicts this story. Which one lied?
Matthew was written nearly 300 years after the fact by political scribes. There is no reason to believe Matthew or any of the gospels or the bible at all.
The writings of the bible were on parchments they were later turned into the canon in the 300`s. But so called Christian followers were writing way sooner then the 300 year figure you site.
Absolute rubbish from you again AB. Citations and evidence please. Your "Rylands fragment" has already been disproved, as has your espousal of poor old platypus, sorry, Polycarp. You have NO evidence of your assertion, none.
And you mean papyrii. Parchment was invented much later. "During the 2nd century BC people in the region of the Mediterranean begin using a much more expensive alternative to papyrus. Tradition credits its invention to Eumenes II, who rules in Pergamum on the west coast of Turkey from 197 to 159 BC. The substance is parchment (the ..." So if the testimonies were on parchment nothing was written until after 197CE at the earliest. At least fifty years after the supposed event. Note the "More expensive" it is unlikeley that parchment was widely available to your "poor apostles" in any quantity if at all until long after their deaths, The use of parchment was becoming widespread about the 3rd century.
Please unload that pistol of yours before you shoot yourself in the foot again.
You are dismissed. An F once again this semester AB.
Prove it AG! Produce one single parchment written. The fact is there aren't any. NOT ONE! The fact is the "new testament" didn't exist before the 300s!
Dead right Mykcob, I am just attempting to point to large historical inaccuracies in a supposed contemporary account.
Jesus never existed anyhoo! Tomb or no tomb is a moot point!
So, here's something to consider after hearing about how expensive all the tombs were back then. Maybe the tomb was financed and on some sort of payment plan, and somebody missed a payment shortly before Jesus got put in, so they had to evict him? OR, hey, maybe the tomb was just a rental! Yeah! You know, kinda like the storage units we have today. I mean, it would definitely make sense being that he knew he would be out of there within three days. Why fully pay for the tomb in that case? Hell, he probably even rented it under a false name just to keep people from being able to trace him after he left.
That is a good theory TM...just reading that I could tell your are an American!
I prefer my study that noted that The Preparation for Passover included acts of charity for Jews including the purchase and preparation of tombs for the penurious. It was considered in the BCE and CE eras a very pious thing to subscribe to the purchase of a common burial area, the corpses were brought in and embalmed with ritual prayers, herbs and oils according to law ( which of course the poor could not afford) and the boxes for their remains inscribed if their names were known.
As much as I like your modern capitalist explanation, I am sure when some archaeologist digs up your metal carcass, all polished and looked after with a well rotted human heart at its core...they will wonder and LO! we shall see our descendants worshipping the miracle tin man, neither "Man nor Can" You words of erudition and scholarship from these forum pages will become gospel and quoted by innocents at night as they pray to the hybrid Metallic Saviour. They will be debated on the Titanium forum by metallicas and ametals alike in the angriest of terms.
@Old Man Re: "....They will be debated on the Titanium forum by metallicas and ametals alike in the angriest of terms."
Awww.... You flatter me, Old Man. And while I admit that being the center of such heated debate would be a blast, alas I have already put other plans into place in the event of my death. If all goes well, I shall be melted down and divided into equal parts to be sent to certain breweries around the world to be used as bottle caps for my top favorite malted beverages. Cheers!
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&cad=rja... Here is the story and the confirmation that I been saying all along to when the bible was first written in the first century AD
Stuff and nonsense AB...this is just a wikepedia definition of what consists of the NT as we know it today.
As useful as defining "a cow" without defining whether it is a dairy cow, a breeding (beef) cow or a dead cow,
Please note Wikepedia is NOT the defining word on issues such as this. It is a useful tool in leading you to further research. That is all.
Pages