JFJ Forums

During the current discussions surrounding Roman Catholicism I discovered this article in the British Church Newspaper of 22 December 2006. What is the latest on this please? Has the Vatican now taken over Kings David's tomb to swell their earthly treasury?

King David’s tomb, situated on Mount Zion, is one of Israel’s most sacred sites. The Vatican is trying to gain ownership of the so called Cenacle, the alleged place of the Last Supper, which lies above it. The Israeli Government, ever looking to boost tourist income, has drawn up a draft agreement which would transfer much of the Crusader area to Rome together with the lucrative tourist interest, but the news has caused an outcry in Israel.

The King David’s Tomb complex is a group of buildings covering some 100,000 square feet where David and Solomon, and kings of Judea, are said to be buried. “It is certainly one of the holiest spots in the Land of Israel,” Rabbi Herman said. “We’ve already given away the Temple Mount and the Machpelah Cave, except for here and there when we’re allowed in; now they want to give Mt. Zion away as well? For thousands of years, this area was almost always totally closed off to Jews. God gave it back to us in 1948.

Rome also wants to take control of the walkways throughout the area. There is talk of envelopes containing large sums of money being passed as bribes to overcome objections. Normally the Lands Authority requires open bidding on purchases of public sites but there has been no auction. There is said to be pressure from the United States for Israel to relent in some of its negotiations with the Vatican.

It is Proposed to charge visitors $10. At the moment access is free. Rome plans to hold masses in the Last Supper Room from 6 to 8 am. This has been denounced by Israelis as idolatry.

Jews will only be allowed free acess to the tomb between 7 and 9 in the morning.

DavidJ

In Tosefta’s Baba Batra 1:11, and the Jerusalem Talmud’s Nazir 57(d), we are told that the Tomb of David has a rock fissure access from the Kidron Valley on this Eastern Mount.

In Nehemiah 3:16, David’s Tomb is described as being (de facto) on the Mount of Olives, at the Hill of Offence, directly near to and opposite the Pool of Siloam.

In the Roman History of Dio Cassius, .69, we are educated that the tomb of David survived beyond the 70 A.D. siege by Titus, but did not stand upright as far as the Second Revolt of 132 A.D.  

The question I have is: Is the site being bought really King David's tomb?

If archaeologists wish to find what might be left David’s sepulchre as it stood in the First Century A.D., all they need do is locate the Pool of Siloam, move due East or Southeast across the Valley, locate the rock fissure, and trace it into Olivet.  That  sepulchre of David will lie immediately north of the fissure, while Christ’s resurrection tomb will lie south of the fissure, and some distance from it (probably 144 cubits or 216 feet from the position of where the Romans erected Christ on the Cross).  

Since the Roman sieges altered the landscape and filled in the valleys, this will be mildly difficult.  Further, Jewish tradition (publicly cited by the Temple Institute) says that King David's bones were relocated in Bethlehem. The question is, were they ever relocated back to this other site...or did they ever really leave the first one?  

Further, if Israel is so insensitive not to take their own Temple Mount back, why would they be worried about a (according to my understanding) "Byzantine" site claiming to be King David's tomb?  

I have no idea why Israel is insensitive about Temple Mount; in fact I had no idea they were. However, the question I was interested in having ansered was, "Has the Vatican now taken over Kings David's tomb to swell their earthly treasury?" That is of course not the real tomb as you have kindly explained.

DavidJ

David,
  Judaism and Roman Catholicism both share an innate desire to possess in this world and in this lifetime. So the answer is yes...and perhaps this is the first of many purchases to come.  If they are smart, they would buy the size of two football fields of land that I have remarked on, and excavate Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, and the real tomb of David along the fault line.  The numbers and dollars that would swell their churches and treasuries upon such a discovery would be astronomical, especially if they develop and protect the sites for the multitudes of tourists who will "have to" pilgrimmage to Jerusalem afterwards.  I think prophecy points to such a coming discovery to make Jerusalem a burdensome stone.  

Whereas Judaism is willing to give up possessions and (insanely, their own) land for "Peace", Roman Catholicism out of the Vatican is not.  They will do what they have to, and pass along the expenses as if it were a business, as recent and old events...the molestation scandals of priests in the US, or the WWII war-years collections of gold from the Nazis through Switzerland as compensations for confiscations of their Church properties and/or income losses... have taught us.  

But it would be a feather in their cap to buy up the old sites.  I would rather the Roman Catholics than the vandalizing Muslims be such overseers.  However, every square inch of Israel belongs to those of the 13 tribes of Israel to dwell in.  If the land is "sold", it should only be "sold" as if a 70 or 99 year lease, and then revert back to the State of Israel.  Israel is for the descendants of Abraham and Isaac through Jacob by Divine Right.  That is my opinion and belief.  



  

An opinion and belief I share with you. Thank you for your enightening information.

DavidJ

I believe the area you have described is owned by Israel, if the Catholic Church wants to lease it for a  summ of money alright but Israel should never sell  it's heritage!

Indeed it is a doubt, if it is realy King Davids grave. I sometimes see some Jewish kids pray there, but it is not a such super wanted place...
But in the area are a Yeshiva's etc. it's not so small.
But in 1948? was it not U.N.-international ground, till the Jordanians took it???
I think it became Israeli after during the 60's...

Israel law is somewhere between Ottoman, English and Biblicall or zionist law...

Large parts of Jerusalem are owned by Churches, sometimes complete neighborhoods. Also the Knesset stands on Greek-Orthodox owned property... The State of Israel pays the Church for the rent...

Even when Theodore Herzl went to the pope, he sayd ''we don't want Jerusalem, we only want the coastline''  Why I don't know, politicall? to get the Church in a certain mood?

Two years ago when Jews wanted to buy 2 Hotels in the Old City, owned by the Greek Orthodox Church... it became to difficulties.  1 of the Managers of the Hotels was a Palestinian, and it where ''Palestinian run hotels''. So the Christian Palestinians started to boycot Passover, to force the GreekOrthodox Archbishop to be more furm against the selling to Jews...

So now the Jews lease the hotels for 99 years...

Well leasing is an U.N. idea. (partly to give religions less power)

This is incredibly shameful!!

As I write this, on 2/21/2009, I know that theser negotiations are now being subjected to pressure from someone in the United Nations, who is trying to make at least part of Jerusalem an "international city".

What has happened to Israel?

Throw out these gonnifs!  (I'm Jewish but I don't know exactly what this word means, though I do know it's not good.)

We want Israel for Jews.  And yes, I'm also a Christian, for 38 years.  And Israel was given to the Jews by the God of the Bible.

And look at Sharon, who gave away part of what is now Gaza to the Palestinians.  See how he has benefited from the choice he made.

And the 2006 war, IMO, was fought for one reason only:  Israel acted foolishly.