Why can't Christians Verify Exactly Where Jesus Was Buried?

[Aractus]

No.  You have no idea what "pauline" is because we do not have the originals.

Well that's a completely moot point - we have hardly any original autographs of ancient works, and of those that do exist they're usually very short and incomplete. The fact that what we have contains some copyist redactions does not mean they're not Pauline. Stop using that stupid fallacy.

Huh?  I said the structure of the SOTM was based on the understanding of the LXX. Anyway it was created in the 3rd Century BCC According to Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint:

History

The date of the 3rd century BCE is supported (for the Torah translation) by a number of factors, including the Greek being representative of early Koine, citations beginning as early as the 2nd century BCE, and early manuscripts datable to the 2nd century.

You really are unbelievably dumb. Even by your own citation, only the Pentateuch is in existence that early. And we know what we have today was modified substantially by Origen in the third century AD, and since the Hexapla no longer exists we don't know how much he modified, but we do know he modified it substantially. Almost every manuscript in existence today that contains "the LXX" contains a copy of the fifth column of the Hexapla and not a copy of what existed before it. And those that don't have Origen's recensions they are late manuscripts and incomplete.

and it was the bible that Jesus and his disciples used http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-stu...38841.html
So what I am saying is that the composition of the SOTM was based on an understanding of the LXX

There's no evidence whatsoever that Jesus used, or had ever seen, the LXX. The way the he talks about the scriptures is unmistakeably Hebraic. The "complete LXX" does not appear anywhere in history until the third century AD in the fifth column of the Hexapla. True Origen didn't assemble the pre-hexapla version of the lxx - but we don't know when or by whom it was done, it could have been done earlier in the third century. Every time that Luke quotes the Pentateuch he's quoting from the Hebrew, not the LXX - do you dispute this?

Remember it was composed in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic and it assumes temple cult doesn't exist.

We don't know what language it was composed in - in was written down in Matthew in Greek. That doesn't prove that Jesus was speaking Greek. In fact he could have delivered some teachings in Greek and others in Hebrew, and still others in Aramaic. You can't possibly assume to know what language he was speaking just because Matthew is written in Greek, just like you can't know what edition of the Old Testament he was quoting from.

As for what you're calling "temple cult" I think you have it wrong. Jesus was against what certain groups were teaching about Judaism, and wanted to bring people back to what he saw has true Judaism. He basically asserted that he had authority to teach, and that a large number of other teachers (i.e. those associated with the Sadducees and the Pharisees) were wrong. Jesus was at least associated with the Essenes, and he may have been one. They also made use of the Temple just like the Sadducees & Pharisees. And if Jesus wasn't an Essene then he seems to have shown little interest in opposing their interpretation of Judaism.