|This is my opening thesis which I would like to defend, illustrate and expand in this lecture.|
|This is how the ancient tomb looked. Newer development allowed for a more efficient use of space. |
Tombs were expensive to make and were often shared by large families of clans. Ossuaries were boxes for bones after the body decomposed.
|This is the historically oldest known preserved story (and first ever mention!) about the empty tomb of Jesus as translated by NRSV. It dates to the early 8th decade of the Common Era.|
|The traditional Orthodox depiction of the Ressurection (H ANASTASIS). Venetian mosaic actually took inspiration from the broadly established orthodox mode of depicting the resurrection.|
|The text critical
(more precisely tradition criticism) approach is further supported by
the historical context and archeology of crucifixion as we discussed in the previous lecture. Minor inconsistencies in this explanation only strengthen it. |
As we stated in our opening thesis: The story of an opened and empty tomb is ahistorical, (unconcern about matters of history). On the other hand the historical-critical method can help us describe and interpret its emergence and gradual development.
The story’s original function was kerygmatic (sharing the message). Its popularity grew from powerful symbolism and its veracity is that of mythical metaphors and deep spiritual archetypes.