I was reading a National Geographic article about the recent restoration work done at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Israel in which the stone slab that covered the supposed resting place of Jesus was removed. According to the article, it went on to say: > ...it was first identified by Helena, mother of the Roman emperor Constantine, in A.D. 326. I researched a bit more about Helena's visit to Jerusalem and came upon another article that had this to say about her visit: > The site was identified in the year 326, when the Emperor Constantine’s mother Helena went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in search of relics from the time of Christ. She asked the residents of Jerusalem where the site of Jesus’ tomb was, and they directed her to a spot where a pagan temple now stood. We might be justifiably sceptical that the people in Jerusalem at that time would have known where Jesus’ tomb once was and suspect that out of deference to the Emperor’s mother they pointed to some site. Read more: [#500 Excavating the Tomb of Jesus](http://www.reasonablefaith.org/excavating-the-tomb-of-jesus#ixzz4QDzpfrWk) **Does anyone know the source for this claim? Specifically want to research more on Helena asking residents of Jerusalem where the site of the tomb was.**

Christians commonly celebrate Good Friday as the day that Jesus was crucified, and Easter Sunday as the day that Jesus rose from the tomb. Most relevant verses in scripture say that Jesus would be in the tomb for three days. (See Matthew 26:61 ; Mark 8:31 ; John 2:19 .) However, one verse states that Jesus would also be in the tomb for three nights: > For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the > belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three > nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40) How can this be? Friday to Sunday could be considered three days, but it is only two nights. I've heard it explained before that the Jewish people would define the end of one day and the start of the next as sundown, or about the 12th hour. This is why the Sabbath would always start on Friday at sundown. Jesus was buried just before sundown, or just before the Sabbath began (Matthew 27:57-61 ; Mark 15:42-47 ; Luke 23:50-56 , John 19:38-42 ). This can explain the three days, but as the other commenter pointed out, it still does not explain the three nights.

Many exegetes claim, without proof, that Jesus resurrected before the angel rolled back the stone, in order to show that he passed through it as he could walk through doors or as he was born out of the Blessed Virgin Mother's closed, virginal womb. Commentaries on >Mt. 28:2 And behold there was a great earthquake. For an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and coming, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. 1. St. Thomas Aquinas, *Commentary on St. Matthew* , ch. 28:

Christ had already risen: for as He went out from a closed womb, so He went out from the sealed tomb.

2. Ven. Bede, as quoted by St. Thomas in *Catena in Mt.* cap. 28 l. 1 :

"And came and rolled back the stone;" not to open the door for the Lord to come forth, but to give evidence to men that He was already come forth. For He who as mortal had power to enter the world through the closed womb of a Virgin, He when become immortal, was able to depart out of the world by rising from a sealed sepulchre.

3. Cornelius à Lapide, S.J., *Commentary on Matthew 22-28* , ch. 28:

*And rolled away the stone*, of the sepulchre of Christ. Not that He might rise out of it, for He had already risen while the sepulchre was closed, but that he might show to the women that Christ their God and Lord had already risen. Opening to them a way to the sepulchre, he showed it to them empty of the body of Christ. For as Christ was born from the closed womb of the Virgin, so also He rose from the closed sepulchre.

But what evidence is there that the Resurrection occurred before the angel rolled back the stone?

We see at Matt 27: 64-66 the Chief Priests and Pharisees getting permission to secure the tomb of Jesus : "....Therefore command the tomb to be made secure until the third day; otherwise his disciples may go and steal him away, and tell the people, ‘He has been raised from the dead,’ and the last deception would be worse than the first.” Pilate said to them, “You have a guard of soldiers; go, make it as secure as you can.” So they went with the guard and made the tomb secure by sealing the stone. "" In the account of Mark at 16:1-4, we get the narration of women disciples visiting the tomb of Jesus : "When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back" There is no mention of the seal'which the High Priests and Pharisees put on the tomb of Jesus , in Mark's account which only mentions the large stone. One therefore, is left to presume that what Matthew meant by `seal' is only the large stone which was guarded by soldiers, and that the preceding day of Resurrection having been the Sabbath day, nobody would have moved the stone in order to anoint the body of Jesus. My question therefore, is: How does the Catholic Church narrate the seal which was put on the tomb of Jesus ?

As per the Gospels of Matthew (27:60), Mark (15:46 ) and Luke (23:53) , the Body of Jesus, after his crucifixion was laid in a tomb 'hewn in the rock'. That all the evangelists except John mention the make of the tomb, suggests that there is some significance to it. My question is: are there any official teachings from the side of Catholic Church on the significance of the make of the tomb viz. hewn in rock , in which Jesus was laid after his crucifixion ?

There's been a lot of news recently about the renovation of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the opening of the tomb for the first time in a long time (200 years I believe). Growing up though I had always been shown pictures of the Garden Tomb as the likely site of Jesus' burial and resurrection. I am curious to know what claims of authenticity each site have, as well as other major purported sites of Jesus' burial and resurrection (looking around online it seems there are more than just the two named here). I ask all this with the realization that it is probably impossible for us to know the exact location of Jesus' tomb from archaeology and tradition alone. I'm not asking for an answer as to which location is the most likely location, just what claims of authenticity each site have.

As per the Gospels of Matthew (27:60), Mark (15:46 ) and Luke (23:53) , the Body of Jesus, after his crucifixion was laid in a tomb 'hewn in the rock'. That all the evangelists except John mention the make of the tomb, suggests that there is some significance to it. I hope that this was written to indicate that Jesus had, in his burial, fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah at 53:9 (RSVCE): > And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death... Clearly, only a rich man could afford to construct a grave hewn in rock. And, Matthew 27:57 in deed depicts Joseph of Arimathe'a in whose new tomb the body of Jesus was laid, as a rich man ! My question is: are there any official teachings from the side of Catholic Church confirming that Jesus was in deed fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah by being buried in a tomb hewn in the rock ?

As the title asks, what do modern Christian religions believe happened to Jesus' **physical** body after the resurrection? From John 20:11 - 14: > Now Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to > look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' > body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot. > > They asked her, "Woman, why are you crying?" > > "They have taken my Lord away," she said, "and I don’t know where they > have put him." At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing > there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. As far as I know, there is no further scriptural evidence or discussion concerning this.

Can someone point me to a OT prophecy about the Messiah being in the tomb for 3 days? As general or specific as you can think of. I think I have one, and it seems pretty obvious to me, but a lot of Bible commentators don't mention it.

As it was mentioned in this topic , reading the New Testament side by side, one can pick up apparent inconsistencies in the Gospels by various Disciples. As it was suggested that they should be explained on a case by case basis, lets start with the opening of Jesus' tomb. Looking at four different passages: > Mathew 28:2 > There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the > Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the > stone and sat on it. > Mark 16:4-5 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed > in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. > > Luke 24:2-4 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but > when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. > While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that > gleamed like lightning stood beside them. > > John 20:11-12 Now Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, > she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, > seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at > the foot. How is this inconsistency explained by theologians of the various major denominations of Christianity, especially the ones that believe in Biblical inerrancy ?

We can be pretty sure it isn't in Japan . The two most referenced sites are: * The Aedicule of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and * The Garden Tomb . However, both stake their claims by virtue of their proximity to _Golgotha_ . (Proponents of the two tomb sites also disagree on the location of Jesus' crucifixion.) However, I don't see anything in the Gospel texts that indicate where the tomb might have been in relation to the crucifixion site: > And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate was surprised to hear that he should have already died. And summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he was already dead. And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the corpse to Joseph. And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.—Mark 15:42-47 (ESV ) We know _who_ the tomb belonged to, but not where it was situated. In fact, I can see no reason for the tomb not to be anyone of Second Temple burial sites found around Jerusalem. Given the little we know about Joseph, I'd say the Sanhedrin Tombs 1 are as likely than any other candidate. More likely still, the tomb was used by Joseph's family and the connection to Jesus was lost.2 It may very well have been destroyed in one of Jerusalem's many rebuilding projects. Can we know where Jesus was buried? ---------- 1. Oddly, it's difficult to find good information on this site, which is practically neglected. I don't know, for instance, exactly how they got their name or what era they come from. So this suggestion ought to be taken with a shaker of salt. 2. This theory isn't surprising since according to the Gospels, the tomb would have been empty. There was nothing to see and no reason to visit!