© 2007 Mariano Pérez
© 2007 Urantia Association of Spain
Dear friends: a few months ago, five members of the Madrid study group were fortunate (and I am convinced that they were also fortunate) to travel to Israel, also called the “Holy Land” by others. It was a short but intense trip, and at the end of it, we all left wanting more. There were several types of experiences lived: on the one hand, knowing first-hand the political and social problem, largely thanks to our guide; on the other hand, to see the coexistence of the different cultures and religions of the country, which, oddly enough, coexist in peace, at the level of citizenship, respecting each one of the others. It was also an enriching experience in terms of getting to know the area geographically. Seeing the places where our Sovereign Miguel de Nebadón was undoubtedly made us live all of it with much more intensity.
But let’s go in parts. In the first place, it must be taken into account that 2000 years of wars and different empires have buried a good part of the original places, especially in cities like Jerusalem, which houses several layers in its subsoil, and on the other hand the configuration of the places It has nothing to do with what was in the time of Jesus. And even so, certain places attract, surely because of the predisposition, surely because of the religious fervor that is also contagious; but in any case they flood the thought and the heart of the visitor.
Apart from all this, we set ourselves a mission during our excursions: to contrast the so-called “holy” places, that is, where Jesus was at some important moment in his life on Urantia, or where significant events occurred, with the more or less geographical situation. least concrete of them, which reveals to us The Urantia Book. We preferred to know if this or that place that we were going to visit was the authentic place, or if, on the contrary, it was the place that by tradition was chosen by the Church at some point, as the place where the events occurred. And our surprise was great when we verified that in several cases in which it is possible to contrast the information, the “official” places have nothing to do with what the blue book informs us about. It is true that, even with subsequent research efforts, in some cases we cannot say where the exact location of an important site is—we would need to travel there again—but what we can say is where it is not, that is, that the place indicated by tradition is not the real one.
All this has led me to carry out this work, with the sole intention of sharing this information with everyone, so that one day, if someone dares to travel to the place, they will have an advance and clearer vision of what they are going to see, and who knows if it could shed more light on the mystery. Although I understand that the place where certain events occurred —whether they are real or not— is not significant or changes things; It is no less true that, when the “seeker” visitor is in them, he wants to “feel” said place as the real one, as the authentic one, and not as a bad plagiarism.
This work is not only based on information collected on the ground, but a subsequent study work has been necessary in the UB, the gospels, the Internet… By the way, this has led me to a conclusion: that when an important place in the life of Jesus does not correspond with the traditional or the gospels, our revelators seem to give several clues about his location, and in truth, with these clues, with all the information on the ground, hah! and with a compass, it is easier to locate the more or less exact place. This happens to us, for example, with the burial of the teacher, the crucifixion and the house where he lived in Nazareth.
For a better understanding of the study, I will relate the places of greatest interest, the special event that took place there and its traditional location, always related to our Sovereign, since I discard those exclusively related to his relatives or apostles as lacking interest, at least for me. Later I will try to compare both information: the “official” one and that of the Urantia Book, and let each one make their guesses.
The selection is as follows:
| Num | EVENT | TRADITIONAL PLACE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gabriel’s Annunciation to Mary and main home of the childhood and youth of Jesus -Nazareth- | Cave in Church of Annunciation in Nazareth |
| 2 | Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist | Jordan River -near the Dead Sea- |
| 3 | Transfiguration -Jesus enlightened and accompanied by Moses and Elijah- | Mount Tabor - isolated mountain near Nazareth |
| 4 | Via Dolorosa -path traveled by Jesus with the cross- | Jerusalem streets |
| 5 | Crucifixion -Golgotha or Calvary- | Church of the Holy Sepulcher inside the old city |
| 6 | Holy sepulcher -tomb where they deposited the body of Jesus- | Church of the Holy Sepulcher inside the old city |
| 7 | Ascension of Jesus -when he ascended to heaven- | Chapel of the Ascension on the Mount of Olives |
¶ Gabriel’s Annunciation to Mary
Christian tradition does not seem to identify the place where the annunciation took place with the home of Jesus’ family; the latter is simply not listed anywhere that we know of. If we stick to the UB we draw the conclusion that both places are the same. The current Church of the Annunciation is the main place to visit, although there is another Orthodox one, which already makes us think. Also very close to there are some excavations where they found remains of tools and carpentry tools from the time, and they present it as the possible workshop of José. The UB gives us some clues about the location of Jesus’ home -UB 122:5.9- and the workshop -UB 123:1.6-. The first thing to locate is the highest mountain to the north of the city, and here comes the first difficulty. The highest to the north is a little outside of Nazareth, although it is possible (and it is a hypothesis) that the old city was not exactly where the current main nucleus, or that the distances are longer than we imagine. If we take mount Har Nadav (1,600 feet) that connects with Har Yona (1,812 feet) as the same mount, or even separately contemplating the two hypotheses, we would have that the house of Jesus would be quite far from the traditional place, that is that is, more to the northeast, and not in the center, since it tells us that it was located to the southeast of the promontory of this hill, in the middle between the road to Cana and the base of the hill, and in any case on the outskirts of the city. As for the fountain reference, I only know that there is a “Fountain of Maria” near there; but it does not mean that it was the fountain of yesteryear and apparently a place of passage for caravans. Certainly it is one of the places in which I have investigated more later -Google Earth is wonderful- and I have been more frustrated, and wanting to go and stay a few days there to analyze all this information on the ground.
¶ Baptism of Jesus
In this event, the error is seen much more clearly, if it can be called that, since the chosen place is recognized as traditional rather than real. This happens in several cases, that is, that due to ignorance or lack of existing information, a place was chosen to serve as veneration, normally accompanied by a Church. This is not the case of the place of pilgrimage to the Jordan River, that is to say, it does not have a church as such, although it is very visited by tourists, who in many cases are baptized with a tunic included (which they naturally rent), either for their religion or simply by following the custom. It is considered a sacred river, which cannot be entered with a normal bathing suit, in short, things of commerce; something constant the latter in all visits and very well studied by the Israeli or Palestinian people.
The traditional site is a few miles north of the Dead Sea, where the river flows, and near Jericho to the east. According to The Urantia Book-UB 135:8.1- the place would be at the height of the city of Pella in Jordan, that is, about 70 kilometers north of the place marked by tradition. As you can see, there is a considerable distance; but it will not be the only case.
¶ The Transfiguration
The event of the transfiguration of Jesus, apart from Peter’s confusion as to the beings that visited his teacher, that it was actually Gabriel and Father Melchizedek, instead of Moses and Elijah, is another clear error in as to its location. In this case, according to the UB, this event occurred on Mount Hermon, halfway to its high, snow-capped summit in winter, and not on Mount Tabor as traditionally assigned, which is 85 kilometers further south. . Actually the canonical gospels -Matthew, Mark and Lucas- speak of a high hill, but its name is never mentioned. Rather, it has been popular tradition that has placed it on Mount Tabor, because it is a mountain isolated from the rest and is located in Galilee, not far from Nazareth. oh! And, of course, at its top it also has its Church dedicated to the event.
¶ Painful way
If there is any place in Israel that is more “loaded” with places of worship, on the figure of Jesus or his surroundings, that is without a doubt Jerusalem.
One of them is distributed along some streets of the city: La Vía dolorosa. This supposed path traveled by Jesus towards Golgotha is yet another example of the designation of “holy places” as a need to locate them somewhere, rather than as a real place with a historical or archaeological basis. The traditional location of the route through the streets of Jerusalem is the consequence of placing the route from the Antonia Tower -which does correspond to its true historical location to the northwest of the Temple- to Golgotha.
The erroneous location of the latter is what makes a large part of the route of the Via Dolorosa not correspond to reality, based on the UB. It would only correspond to the III station, the rest to the Holy Sepulcher is part of what was said above.
¶ References
- Light and Life Magazine (all old issues): https://aue.urantia-association.org/numeros-antiguos-del-lyv/