Talk:The Garden Tomb
- 1 Regarding Gordon
- 2 Tagging
- 3 Constantine a "Pagan" Emperor?
- 4 Genral cleanup
- 5 To include or not include Gordon's credentials
- 6 Citation for claim that Gordon endorsed the "Garden Tomb"
- 7 "Unanimity" that Holy Sepulchre was outside walls
- 8 Josephus supports Garden Tomb ?
- 9 Archaeological investigations and critical analysis
- 10 the claim that tombs were never placed west of the city is ludicrous and wrong
From the page on General Gordon, he was in Palestine 1882-83, and in Khartoum from February 1884 until his death in January 1885. Searching the internet, I find dates for Gordon's theory of 1883, 1884, 1885 and 1894 (!). [I wonder if, say, his theories were published after his death ?] -- Beardo 06:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm tagging this article as a stub due to the current lack of detail. Chrylis 21:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Constantine a "Pagan" Emperor?
Is there a reason for the refernce to Constantine being a "pagan emperor" in this article? Constantine is regarded as the first Christian emperor of Rome, which makes the pagan reference seem odd. Is it possibly due to a bias on the part of the author to discredit the Church of the Holy Sepulchre? Sastark 22:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the "Pagan" for reasons you stated.
- FYI. Constantine was not baptized until near his time of death, and then by an Aryan Christian rather than an Orthodox Christian. There is much scholarship that suggests that, although sympathetic to the Christian cause, he was not himself a Christian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I've tried to clean up this article and put the ideas it expresses into the context of the archiological evidence and tradition, including links to other articles.LCP 18:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
To include or not include Gordon's credentials
Mdbrownmsw states, “Gordon's credentials certainly belong in an article about him. Here, they were presented as part of the argument against the site.” The information is not given any rhetorical weight. It is statement of fact. Nevertheless, Mdbrownmsw may be correct about whether or not it should be included. I think Gordon’s credentials have everything to do with helping the reader to asses the quality of the claim that the Garden tomb is the burial site of Jesus. I would like to discuss this possibility here. I have reverted only for the sake of discussion and am not trying to start a revert war.LCP 19:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted back to Md's version just to give Md the benefit of the doubt.LCP 20:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Citation for claim that Gordon endorsed the "Garden Tomb"
I don't have the time, but perhaps someone can take a look and include the the ref if there is one. Gordon's Palestine .
"Unanimity" that Holy Sepulchre was outside walls
It's been a year since the claim that scholars "unanimously" agree that the traditional location was outside the walls was tagged as needing a citation. No such citation has been forthcoming. Since this claim contradicts the entire section it follows, I have removed it. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Josephus supports Garden Tomb ?
According to the Jewish Encyclopedia:
- "According to Josephus, the name of a hill north of the Temple-mound, and separated from the latter by a valley. After the erection of the third wall it became part of the city of Jerusalem. Josephus ("B. J." ii. 15, § 5; ii. 19, § 4; v. 4, § 2; v. 5, § 8) gives the meaning of the name as "New City," according to which "Bezetha" is a strange transcription of . A more correct rendering is "house of olives""
the Garden Tomb resides in the Valley of Bezetha, a short & straight distance due north of Pilate's headquarters. And, according to the Gospel of John 19, Jesus' tomb was "new", never used before by men. If the Garden Tomb was located in a "new" part of the city, then it may have been "new" and unused. And, Bezetha lies a short distance due north of ancient Mt. Zion (Temple Mount, Fortress Antonia). Plausibly, Pilate marched Jesus straight north out of town, having him crucified atop the first hill encountered. And so, Josephus seems to support the Garden Tomb being the "new" tomb in the "new" part of the city. Perhaps a professional could cite some sources, so improving the present piece ? 188.8.131.52 (talk) 09:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- On second thought, as the Akeldama Potter's Field, where Judas' body was dumped, resides to the south of Jerusalem; so the Garden Tomb resides to the north. Such an anti-symmetry seems symbolically significant. Perhaps these comments could help some scholar improve the present article ? 184.108.40.206 (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Archaeological investigations and critical analysis
I was surprised to read the only archaeological analysis cited was that of an article Barkay submitted to Biblical Archaeological Review back in the 80s. There are other scholars, both prior and after that article, who have written research papers which disagree with him. To have a balanced view they should also receive mention. I really don't have the time to do that right now but if someone else does not do it then I may be able to find time later. CWatchman (talk) 19:22, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
One researcher submits evidence that Gordon's Calvary was most likely the true Calvary but Gordon's Garden Tomb was not the correct tomb. This scholar says the real tomb, however, would be very close by.
I believe that both Gordon's Calvary and the Holy Sepulcher (of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher) both hold some kind place in the history of the crucifixion but I am not yet certain what. I suspicion the present Holy Sepulcher may have been where he was flagellated. Then again perhaps he was crucified on Gordon's Calvary and buried at the Holy Sepulcher. Then again there is some very convincing research showing that both Gordon's Calvary and Gordon's Tomb are the best candidates for the original Calvary and Tomb. However, at present most secular scholars accept Barkay's article without much question, although Barkay's research was seriously flawed. CWatchman (talk) 20:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
the claim that tombs were never placed west of the city is ludicrous and wrong
I have removed that statement since the reference it sites (Baba Batra 25a) does not actually proscribe that tombs should not be placed west of the city, only that tombs should be at least 50 cubits from a city, and that tanneries should not be placed to the west of the city. Besides that, first century tombs are found inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and elsewhere west of Jerusalem making the claim particularly ridiculous and irrelevant.