Original King David Tomb Monument a cross between Pyramid and an Obelisk with Columns

Everyone that goes to Jerusalem, these days, can visit something called King David's Tomb in the bottom of an old Church, but this was not the real tomb in the days of Jesus and Rome controlling Jerusalem. So, what did the real tomb look like and where was the Upper Room?

Well, this model appears to offer some help with finding where it stood and what it looked like.





The main site has other very interesting photos of a model of old Jerusalem:

emp.byui.edu...

It would appear it isn't too unusual to link David's star with this monument and the monument to the symbols of old Egypt, with a little Rome tossed in the columns at the top.


It is also interesting to see the half-circle threater that stood very near this site in the old days.

Plus, the layout of the 2nd temple, complete with smoke it appears.


So, the curious question then becomes, when they speak of the Upper Room over the Tomb of David, was it a room with no windows sitting under a pyramid, or was it one of the close by buildings that don't exactly fit the Upper Room over the Tomb of David story. The DaVinci Paitning suggests a room with windows, but was that correct and is there more to the story of the Upper Room?

Pyramid is just a structure man, just a building and a tomb is just a tomb. The egyptian pyramids hail back before the Antediluvians and was built by Enoch who was the first Prophet King of YHWH.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


The "Upper Room" was on Mt. Zion, (Moriah) and David was buried across town in the old city of David.

This old map has some interesting details about the Essene Quarter and the location for the Upper Room:





It comes from this page that has several other maps:

www.biblecities.com...

reply to post by MagnumOpus


The upper room is the Cenacle. David's tomb is in the old city of David, not the same place.

You know, I'm just going to make the general observation that

emp.byui.edu...

points to a webpage at Brigham Young University (aka: the Mormons), so one might want to consider its content in light of its source.

Originally posted by adjensen
You know, I'm just going to make the general observation that

emp.byui.edu...

points to a webpage at Brigham Young University (aka: the Mormons), so one might want to consider its content in light of its source.

Ah yes, and we will no doubt find masonic stuff hidden all in those maps. I love searching for things hidden in plain sight. Going to have to take a closer peek to see if i can find where"Waldo" is.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

The upper room is the Cenacle. David's tomb is in the old city of David, not the same place.

Well, it is postulated that David is burried in one of two tunnel tombs in the City of David, but due to damage nobody has proven that one way or the other.

Until someone goes and digs up the tomb of David, nobody knows where it is.

Just as there is a fake tomb at the church on the slopes of Mt Zion today, there could have been a fake tomb in the times of Jesus also. I don't think anyone has even bothered to open the box at the church to look for bones, so even that is in question.

Sounds like one of the rulers wanted to plunder the tomb of David, so it sounds like there was more to it than a hole in the ground, perhaps a monument tomb. It would hardly be worth the trouble to plunder that little tiny room under this Mt. Zion church.

Originally posted by adjensen
You know, I'm just going to make the general observation that

emp.byui.edu...

points to a webpage at Brigham Young University (aka: the Mormons), so one might want to consider its content in light of its source.

The web page is all about photos of a scale model of the Jerusalem area in the period of Jesus, so I don't think they faked the model. And even today, there is a tomb of david told to be in the general area of Mt Zion's slopes. The question is then, is there some old history that points to this being the shape for the tomb. After all, this tomb must have had some size to it as two different rulers tried to break into it and plunder its wealth.

As of yet, nobody has looked to see if there are bones in the Mt. Zion tomb, and they evidently can't get into the Tunnel Tombs over in City of David to look for a tomb there that as worth of breaking into to plunder wealth,

There is also a legend for treasure connected with David's tomb, so there is more than enough reason for not finding the real deal.


Plus, the wall used to enclose this area and the area was called the Essene Quarter and there was an Essene Gate in the wall that was just near King David's tomb. Since the wall isn't there any longer and perhaps the tomb met the same fate. There are two people that moved the wall above this David's Tomb site and were beheaded and their tombs are said at the Jaffa Gate. So, there appears some big goings on about if the tomb was fake and excluded from the walled area, two designers beheaded for doing that.

www.itsgila.com...

Legend has it that Turkish Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent who commissioned the rebuilding of the city walls in 1538 was furious when he discovered that David’s Tomb was left unprotected outside the city walls. He summoned the two architects responsible before him and ordered that they be beheaded. The architects are buried right inside the Jaffa Gate, some say so that people entering and exiting the city could spit on their graves to show their displeasure that the tomb of Nabi Daud (the prophet David according to the Moslems) was left unprotected outside the city walls.

And the Quest goes on.


The appearance is there might be a big rock cut tomb under this church, which may have replaced the Herod Monument Entrance for the tomb.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by adjensen
You know, I'm just going to make the general observation that

emp.byui.edu...

points to a webpage at Brigham Young University (aka: the Mormons), so one might want to consider its content in light of its source.

Ah yes, and we will no doubt find masonic stuff hidden all in those maps. I love searching for things hidden in plain sight. Going to have to take a closer peek to see if i can find where"Waldo" is.

Just as there is a big issue with the treasures of King Solomon, so is there a story that King David hid away a big lot of gold with his tomb in collecting up money to build the first temple. So, this appears the quest for two different sets of tomb robbers that broke into David's tomb to plunder wealth.

That would have to be something bigger than this little church basement deal on Mt. Zion that tell is the Tomb of David.

And if the story goes David was always buried in the City of David, which isn't Mt. Zion's tomb, then there is more to the story. Which that model suggests.

www.bible-history.com...

It seems (Josephus Ant. 16:7, section 1) Herod attempted to plunder David's tomb, but being strangely interrupted built a white stone monument in atonement at the mouth of the tomb.

So, for folks that can do a bit of real digging around to find the little bits of information that find the rest of the story is that Herod built a White Stone Monument over the entrance to the tomb of David, which was a rock cut tomb with chambers.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

According to Josephus, Herod broke into David's tomb to rob it, but when he tried to go into the inner chamber tongues of fire shot out (Jos., Ant., 16:7:1). The site is also mentioned in the New Testament (Acts 2:29).

-----

The tomb of David was probably destroyed at the time of the Bar Kokhba revolt (135 C.E.), and afterward the exact location of the site was forgotten.

-------

Benjamin of Tudela (c. 1173) reports a story about the miraculous discovery of David's tomb on Mt. Zion during the repairing of a church on the site

And thus we find there is more to the story and it appears several didn't do any homework.

Be careful about charging folks for not doing homework. King David was buried in the city of David, just as the scriptures indicate.

Here

So, as one digs more deep into the stone monument for David's tomb, one has to get into the games of Herod The Great and look for his tomb.

Herod also has a big monument for his tomb and it involved giant white stones and grand architecture.

Herods monument to himself was out in the desert and has only recently been discovered. Herold made himself a mountain that some called a small pyramid mountain, Herodium, and this is where he places his tomb.

www.smithsonianmag.com...

Netzer has also found the corner pilasters (columns partially built into the walls), enabling him to estimate that the mausoleum, nestled against the side of the mountain, stood on a base 30 by 30 feet and was some 80 feet high—as tall as a seven-story building. It was built of a whitish limestone called meleke (Arabic for "royal") that was also used in Jerusalem and in the nearby Tomb of Absalom—named after the rebellious son of King David, but likely the tomb of the Judean King Alexander Jannaeus.

------


Netzer is clearly gratified by what he has learned, which is, he says, the "secret" of Herodium: how Herod found a way to keep his vow and be buried in the desert.

So, it seems fitting that the model of Jersulem's David monument would be on the side of a hill, Sion, it would involve white stones, and the pyramid theme from Herod's tomb. So, it may not be so far fetched an idea that the David Monument was similar to the model's license for interpretations.

Plus, in the times of the Essenes, this area was within the walls of the city and called The Essene Quarter and the Essene were called The Guradians of the Tomb of David. It is doubtful that the Essne would be so inept to guard a tomb that was faked as they were so much into finding the truths of religion clear back to the story of Enoch. Would the Essese guard the wrong tomb for David, that would be doubtful.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Again, his tomb was never on Mt. Zion, he was buried in the old city of David. Current archaeological findings have refuted the traditional 12 th century understandings.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Again, his tomb was never on Mt. Zion, he was buried in the old city of David. Current archaeological findings have refuted the traditional 12 th century understandings.

Some day you need to learn to think outside the box of the Bible. If you memorize one book, you limit your field of literacy to being lead by the nose like a beast.

Anyone knows Mt. Zion is the high ground, strategic. Anyone knows that the Temple didn't exist in David's time, but the ark did and it was kept on Mt. Zion, the high ground.

Thus, making when David died that he wanted to be burnied under that Temple location, which is Zion's, and the location of his fathers was the high ground.


Then, making this a highly significant observation:

askelm.com...

Let us now look at an important observation made by Benjamin of Tudela when he got to Jerusalem. He reports an event that occurred 15 years before he visited the city during which some workers on the southwestern hill called by Christians "Mound Zion" (while working on rebuilding a wall of a Christian church) accidentally came upon a cavern which was filled with tombs and other finery that was interpreted by a Jewish resident of Jerusalem as being the tombs of David, Solomon and the other Kings of Judah. The Jewish person who made the interpretation was named Abraham al-Constantini. So, this means (if the story is factual – and later Jews took it to be) that this Abraham al-Constantini must have been in Jerusalem in the year 1054 C.E. (some 15 years before Benjamin of Tudela talked with him about the discovery of the so-called tombs of David, Solomon and the Kings of Judah when he visited the city). Before that period of Abraham al-Constantini (and for a period of at least 52 years) there had not been a single Jew who could enter into Jerusalem. The city had been empty of Jews for over five decades. Indeed, in 1129 C.E., the Spanish Rabbi Abraham Hiyya said: "Not even one Jew is to be found in Jerusalem in our own days" (see Prawer, ibid., p.48).

So, this is palusible and would be the sort of discovery the Knights Templars would value, as well as the Essene, and make keeping the real site for the King's Tombs in these Mt Zion caves and chambers, the best understanding from these times, secret to keep them from being plundered until times were good for folks to discover them.


This story parallels, to some extent, the story for Rennes Le Chateau in Southern France where the Tomb of Jesus is seen to be similarly hidden and the key there is finding things like the treasure of Solomon. One idea unlocks the other because of similarity.

Jesus, being an Eseene and associated with Guardians for the Tomb of David, would be doing similar styled tomb thinking in association with the Templars and Southern France big secrets. The Templars may have even moved Jesus boned back to Jerusalem, long after death to have him with his family at the Lost Tomb of Jesus.


It is this type knowledge that the Templars likely dug up in digging for the secrets and finding out where the Tombs of the Kings was located, and good amount of the treasures. This knowledge would certainly upset the powers of the time that the real special location was not the Solomon's temple, and that the Essenes were right, but not telling the whole story of the underground crypts. Knowledge in common between Jesus, the Essene, and the Templars was the location for the real treasures of the King's.

Such were the secrets that put the Essene and the Templar on the map of real biblical secrets.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Be careful about charging folks for not doing homework. King David was buried in the city of David, just as the scriptures indicate.

Here

With all the Roman quarry work that appears to have totally devastated that area, any real tombs of value would have been long ago discovered and plundered.

I really doubt Harod and the Romans didn't know everything about that area.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Is wikipedia outside the box of the Bible enough?

The current understanding and the discoveries of the City of David tombs lead archaeologists to conclude the tomb at Mt. Zion is actually of Manasseh not David. Archaeology always trumps tradition when it contradicts. He would have been buried in Bethlehem with his forefathers.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Is wikipedia outside the box of the Bible enough?

The current understanding and the discoveries of the City of David tombs lead archaeologists to conclude the tomb at Mt. Zion is actually of Manasseh not David. Archaeology always trumps tradition when it contradicts. He would have been buried in Bethlehem with his forefathers.

I must be speaking to a block of granite. Pardon my ignorance for consideration that outside such a box was possible for you.

This little church deal on Mt. Zion isn't the real tomb of David. It is close to the Herod monument area, maybe even was built on top of where it was, but isn't the tomb of interest. The real ones are not in a building.

The real David Tomb and his ancestors is underground on Mt. Zion, with lots of chambers and lots of other King's tombs inside it. Can you really not even read the citations above. They are very detailed.

So far, though some have seen this undergroud tomb network on Mt. Zion-----it remains undiscovered in the greater recent history of things.


Even your claims on the church area are well off the mark, as that area was leveled and rebuit----so it isn't even similar to the upper room that was spoken of in the times of Jesus. Jesus, nor anyone of interest in that time were never even inside the building that is there today. It isn't the room for the Last Supper, just a room built long after in the same area that doesn't even look like what was there in Jesus period

Your reporting is misleading, and very obviously so

.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


I have been saying the Mt. Zion site isn't David's tomb. And what I said is also on Wikipedia. I think it's better to consider the most up to date archaeological discoveries rather than 12th century tradition, no offense. You're more than welcome to believe what you will though.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

I have been saying the Mt. Zion site isn't David's tomb. And what I said is also on Wikipedia. I think it's better to consider the most up to date archaeological discoveries rather than 12th century tradition, no offense. You're more than welcome to believe what you will though.

With you typical level of inabilty to speak accurately, there is a site on Mt. Zion that is the David Tomb complex.

It isn't the church with the single tomb thing, nor is it the building of the last supper.

It also means this tomb complex down on the South-East finger that you call the City of David isn't the King David tomb complex either.


You speak with too much vague stuff and it appears only to confuse others and try to derail a discussion.

I do think the Harod Monument to David's tomb was in the Essene Quarter, and was the real deal, and is underground as these various sources tell, like Abraham al-Constantini.


What they call the "traditional site" is the real site general area for the tomb of David and the upper room, but what the tourists see isn't the real deal. The original tomb monument was torn down, the building for the last supper was torn down. What is left is all fake stuff.

But, looking underground to the cave complex one might get to the real Tomb of David, as Herod tied to do and this Jewish fella, Abraham al-Constantini, saw in the repair of an old church, and it wasn't in the church but under the church.



I've seen well what you attempt to present, and I am not in support of your themes.