See other Religion Articles
Title: Biblical Pool Uncovered in Jerusalem
Source:
LA Times
URL Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw ... 9aug09,1,1584700.story#Scene_1
Published: Aug 9, 2005
Author: Thomas H. Maugh II
Post Date: 2005-08-09 12:07:39 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: Uncovered, Jerusalem, Biblical
Views: 1153
Comments: 87
Biblical Pool Uncovered in Jerusalem The reservoir served as a gathering place for Jews making pilgrimages and is said in the Gospel of John to be the site where Jesus cured a blind man. By Thomas H. Maugh II, Times Staff Writer Workers repairing a sewage pipe in the Old City of Jerusalem have discovered the biblical Pool of Siloam, a freshwater reservoir that was a major gathering place for ancient Jews making religious pilgrimages to the city and the reputed site where Jesus cured a man blind from birth, according to the Gospel of John. The pool was fed by the now famous Hezekiah's Tunnel and is "a much grander affair" than archeologists previously believed, with three tiers of stone stairs allowing easy access to the water, said Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, which reported the find Monday. "Scholars have said that there wasn't a Pool of Siloam and that John was using a religious conceit" to illustrate a point, said New Testament scholar James H. Charlesworth of the Princeton Theological Seminary. "Now we have found the Pool of Siloam … exactly where John said it was." A gospel that was thought to be "pure theology is now shown to be grounded in history," he said. Religious law required ancient Jews to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem at least once a year, said archeologist Ronny Reich of the University of Haifa, who excavated the pool. "Jesus was just another pilgrim coming to Jerusalem," he said. "It would be natural to find him there." The newly discovered pool is less than 200 yards from another Pool of Siloam, this one a reconstruction built between AD 400 and 460 by the Empress Eudocia of Byzantium, who oversaw the rebuilding of several biblical sites. The site of yet another Pool of Siloam, which predated the version reputedly visited by Jesus, is still unknown. That first pool was constructed in the 8th century BC by Judean King Hezekiah, who foresaw the likelihood that the Assyrians would lay siege to Jerusalem and knew a safe water supply would be required to survive the attack. He ordered workers to build a 1,750-foot-long tunnel under the ridge where the City of David was located. The tunnel connected Gihon Spring in the adjacent Kidron Valley to the side of Jerusalem less vulnerable to an attack. The first Pool of Siloam was the reservoir holding the water brought into the city. It was presumably destroyed in 586 BC when Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar razed the city. The pool of Jesus' time was built early in the 1st century BC and was destroyed by the future Roman Emperor Titus about AD 70. The pool was discovered by a repair team excavating a damaged sewer line last fall under the supervision of Eli Shukron of the Israel Antiquities Authority. As soon as Shukron saw two steps uncovered, he stopped the work and called in Reich, who was excavating at the Gihon Spring. When they saw the steps, Shukron said, "we were 100% sure it was the Siloam Pool." With winter approaching, the two men had to hurry their excavation so the sewer could be repaired before the rainy season. As they began digging they uncovered three groups of five stairs each separated by narrow landings. The pool was about 225 feet long, and they unearthed steps on three sides. They do not yet know how wide and how deep the pool was because they have not finished the excavation. The fourth side lies under a lush garden — filled with figs, pomegranates, cabbages and other fruits — behind a Greek Orthodox Church, and the team has not yet received permission to cut a trench through the garden. "We need to know how big it is," Charlesworth said. "This may be the most significant and largest miqveh [ritual bath] ever found." The excavators have been able to date the pool fairly precisely because of two fortunate occurrences that implanted unique artifacts in the pool area. When ancient workmen were plastering the steps before facing them with stones, they either accidentally or deliberately buried four coins in the plaster. All four are coins of Alexander Jannaeus, a Jewish king who ruled Jerusalem from 103 to 76 BC. That provides the earliest date at which the pool could have been constructed. Similarly, in the soil in one corner of the pool, they found about a dozen coins dating from the period of the First Jewish Revolt against Rome, which lasted from AD 66 to 70. That indicates the pool had begun to be filled in by that time. Because the pool sits at one of the lowest spots in Jerusalem, rains flowing down the valley deposited mud into it each winter. It was no longer being cleaned out, so the pool quickly filled with dirt and disappeared, Shanks said. The story of Jesus and the blind man, as told in John, is well known. Jesus was fleeing the Temple to escape either the priests or an angry crowd when he encountered the man. His disciples asked Jesus who had sinned, the man or his parents, to cause him to be born blind. Jesus said that neither had sinned, but that the man had been born blind so that God's work might be revealed in him. With that, he spat in the dust to make mud, which he rubbed in the man's eyes before telling him to wash it off in the Pool of Siloam. When the man did so, he was able to see.
Poster Comment: Holy water network Archaeologists uncovered an ancient water system outside Jerusalem. Two months of digging at Kibbutz Tzuba ended this week when the rock-hewn conduction network, dating to the time of King Hezekiah in the 8th century B.C.E., was unearthed. Last year the site received world-wide attention with the discovery of a cave said to have been used by John the Baptist and his followers for baptism. It was a monumental enterprise with a vertical shaft, an open horizontal corridor, a flight of stone steps above a tunnel and three external plastered pools, all of which was on a slope above an underground reservoir. Archaeologists say the new discoveries shed light on why this cave would have been chosen, out of the many thousands in the hills of Judah, for bathing rituals. “What baptizers wanted was a place, distant from nearby villages, large enough to contain groups of people coming to be immersed, and ancient enough so that the cultic side of the rituals was put into a context linking them to the time of the Israelite prophets,” said the dig’s leader, Shimon Gibson. http://jta.org/brknews.asp?id=153197
August 9, 2005
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-23) not displayed.
.
.
.
#24. To: Flintlock (#21)
As you very well know, you first asserted my rapture theology was inconsistent. I asked how so, and I said I'd give you an honest answer, depending on what you thought those inconsistencies were. Now instead of you explaining the inconsistencies in my rapture theology, you've backed tracked to asking me if I believe in the rapture. Seemingly now, you're not quite as sure as you thought what my theology was. Yes, I believe in what the bible describes as "the rapture" in 1Thes 4:16-17. Now what about that is inconsistent?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
OK, so why don't Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Churches believe in it? And what about Muslims, are they Devil worshipers?
lol - get them on this thread and ask them what they believe. Don't expect me to speak for them. I speak for myself, what I believe. We seem to be pretty far afield now from your initial assertions about my theologcal inconsistencies, to what others do or do not believe.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
You left out Methodists, Lutherans to name only two and all partial and full preterists in many denominations.
Not at all, you're avoiding the question. The facts are that you and the rest of the rapture crowd are establishing doctrine on one single scripture (1Thes 4:16-17). This is a violation of a Biblical Principle: Gen 41:32 "And the dream was repeated to Pharaoh twice because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass. Deut 17:6"Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness. Cor 13:1 This will be the third time I am coming to you."By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established." 1Thes 4:16-17 the only scripture that even suggests that believers will be "raptured" (caught up together with them in the clouds) Outside of a small minority of believers in this county, nobody else believes it. Now, what about Muslims.
Thank you, I stand corrected.
I can give ya some more :P
Dude, that's easy: Alien DNA spliced with whatever sort of primate they could get their hands on. They just kept trying 'til they got it right. We share like 95 percent of our DNA with frogs, fer chrissakes, so it obviously don't take much. I doubt Homo Sapiens was the first model made in "God's image". Maybe they just got tired of trying. Well, hell, it makes as much sense as any other mythology.
"I've decided it's just a lot more amusing to give out bad advice."
I hope you don't include my Church on that list. At The Holy Coptic Church of the Apocalyptic Neocon Rapture (501)(c)(3), we're "All rapture, All the time" Rev. Flint
LOL naw that one isnt on the list but the Church of Christ, the Christian Church, Espiscopalians, the American Baptists, the Church of God Anderson Indiana (as opposed to the Pentacostal Church of God), Presbyterian to name a few more.
You still don't know what I believe. You first asserted my theology was inconsistent, then you had to ask if I believed at all, and now you're again assuming you know something of my theology and that it also conforms to the "rapture crowd" whoever they are. Where was all that insight a few posts back? I don't know what the "rapture crowd" believes, and no, 1 thes 4:16-17 isn't the only scripture, though it is the one from which "the rapure" term comes, there are others from which the doctrine draws as well. Outside of an even smaller minority still, nobody else seems to belive in the entire bible - most decide to leave out the parts they find inconvenient and in conflict with what they want to believe. Those who choose to disbelieve the rapture choose to ignore Paul's clear teaching on it 1 Thes 4 and 1 Cor 15, and Jesus initially spoke of a similar event in Matt 24:37-42.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I thought so. Heinlein would suggest they be interned in Coventry with the rest of the snake shaking TV Evangelists.
Now I understand. You're right and everybody else is wrong; including some Orthodox Churches with well over 1500 years of history and study. They didn't figure it out after studying the Bible for 1500 years but you and the Schofield/Moody crowd did in an afternoon. It makes perfect sense.
A few more? Nazarenes, Wesleyan Church, Salvation Army, Russian Orthodox...
I believe the bible is right as written, and I don't know what everybody else thinks. I'm not with the Scofield/Moody crowd (though I recognize how utterly dependent you are upon labels and hyperbole to defend your viewpoint).
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
They're all wrong, they're all going to: Cop out
ROFL!! Gosh 1500 years of the hellbound.. poor lost souls. :P
Simple truth. 2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
You're right Flintlock that it is standard christian approach to insist that any idea in the bible, before it is accepted, be found more than once in the bible. To be mentioned only once is not important. It must be mentioned more than once. Well, the so-called 'rapture' ideas are mentioned more than once. Somebody once showed me a place in the bible where it is described just as the rapture proponents say, but it says the coming of the lord will be 'as if' and then it describes a great separation of the people, but it says 'as if' some are just plucked right up and out of the company of the others, and the others are left behind. Sorry, I couldn't find that part that describes it best. But I always focus on the 'as if' part. I think they just described it that way to focus our minds that there will be a great separation of the people at the time when jesus returns and judgement occurs. So, I don't really believe the 'rapture' is the way people describe it, that some will be just plucked up and the rest will still live here. But there will be a great separation of the people. Below are only two sets of verses I did find that do support this rapture idea somewhat, but I remember reading one that supported it much better as I said. Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation [even] to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt. John 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. Jhn 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. Jhn 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, [there] ye may be also. I wish I could find that section where the 'rapture' is described clearly. There was a fellow who showed me several sets of verses that support it better than any of these.
Now, lets talk about Muslims. Devil worshipers, Si' or no?
Jhn 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. Jhn 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, [there] ye may be also. How do these verses have anything to do with a rapture as the premillennialists view it? Yes this has to do with the return of Christ but He promises heaven to those who are called by His name. And just because the lost arent mentioned that doesnt mean that He then will set up a kingdom on thie earth but rather the END and the judgement.
Details, details
I think you're looking for 1Thess 4:16-17 and 1Cor 15:51-51.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
On this I beg to differ. To build a doctrine on one passage is very flawed and as Flint pointed out ..two or more witnesses.
Red Jones specifically said before it is accepted, be found more than once in the bible. You misread his statement. Further the passages about two or more witness are about people giving testimony. Whereas the bible states in 2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;, or do you argue that some passages are not inspired by God, and if so, which ones please?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Has anyone shown you Luke 9:27? But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. Jesus himself seemed to believe the second coming was imminent, and mislead his students thusly.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
well, it doesn't really support the idea that there will be a day when a whole bunch of people will just disappear andt he others carry on. But it speaks how we will go somewhere else. so, it is weak in its support of the way the rapture proponents describe it.
No, I had already looked at that verse when I was figuring out what I could put here.
Where that is because you are believing that Jesus was speaking of something which He was NOT .. what He spoke of was not an earthly kingdom. He was speaking of His death and resurrection and the scripture says the kingdom is WITHIN you. He was speaking of the new covenant purchased with His blood.
IIRC Hey-sus said "before this generation shall pass" a whole bunch of times. Well, the generations passed.
Right. And the other scripture in Corinthians is taken out of the context of the sentence.. the rest of which reads and is speaking of the end when Jesus comes again and the end will come not the end of the age which was spoken of BEFORE His death.. which was of course speaking of the fullment of the old covenant, the new beginning so to speak, the New covenant: 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. 55 "O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?" 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; 57 but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Well, I don't even care about this 'rapture' stuff. But I don't know why Flintlock attacks Starwind as he does. So, I was just trying to defend this 'rapture' as well as I could. But I am an end-timer type of guy as you have correctly perceived. And I do think that the end of this era will come, and that god will come down to earth and build his kingdom here on earth. You probably feel different, but that is OK with me. I certainly do appreciate your feedback regardless.
I was just browsing around the forum and this looks like one of those interesting religion threads. I'll have to start reading it from the beginning though. I just clicked on latest posts and saw this. These kinds of threads are slower reading than other threads because you have to stop every now and then to ponder on something you've just read a more than usual. It's also interesting to see how people interpret scriptures so differently.
It's already established that you believe in a fringe, minority doctrine. Are we going to talk about Muslims or not? I've asked you at least 4 other times and you haven't answered a simple question. Are Muslims devil worshipers, yes or no?
Where that is because you are believing that Jesus was speaking of something which He was NOT .. what He spoke of was not an earthly kingdom. He was speaking of His death and resurrection and the scripture says the kingdom is WITHIN you. He was speaking of the new covenant purchased with His blood. Huh? That's a stretch. He specified "some standing here" which means third parties assembled. "which shall not taste of death" this part means his death and resurrection? Not sure how you read that, but it has to mean physical human death of the assembled persons. The allegorical death sometimes referred to, ie. damnation wouldn't be conducive to seeing (read entering) the kingdom of God. Would it? "which shall not tase of death" shows no reference to himself. No indeed, he clearly meant what was plainly written. the kingdom is WITHIN you. Maybe, but there won't be much space in here for the angel chorus, the house with many rooms and 144,000 individuals. He was speaking of the new covenant purchased with His blood. Point out where, I think that's the interjection of someone eager to explain away his shortcomings. Like the cursing of a fig tree which wouldn't bear fruit out of season.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
On this issue we do disagree but we can 'reason together' without there being animosity and on that we do agree ;)
Okay let me attempt to explain without a huge drawn out post. I didnt mean he was speaking of himself when he said 'which shall taste of death' what I meant was He was referring to those he was speaking to THEY would live to see the kingdom come into being.. that kingdom which the scripture plainly says is within you, within those who are believers. Now the references you are making have nothing to do with an earthly kingdom. Those are allegory and in Revelation. Which has nothing to do with the kingdom. Not sure what you mean.. are you saying why did he do it? or?
Right it is a complex subject and it does take some pondering. Sometimes in an attempt to discuss although I try to be clear I fail LOL
lol - you're on a roll, don't stop now... just go ahead and tell me what I think.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Look, I'll go first. I don't believe Muslims worship satan. What do you think?
Comments (65 - 87) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest May I suggest you look for similar inconsistencies in your rapture theology?
I asked a simple question and wanted a yes or no answer. It me try again, do you believe in the rapture?
#25. To: Starwind (#24)
Yes, I believe in what the bible describes as "the rapture" in 1Thes 4:16-17. Now what about that is inconsistent?
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#26. To: Flintlock (#25)
OK, so why don't Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Churches believe in it? And what about Muslims, are they Devil worshipers?
#27. To: Flintlock (#25)
OK, so why don't Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Churches believe in it?
#28. To: Starwind (#26)
We seem to be pretty far afield now from your initial assertions about my theologcal inconsistencies, to what others do or do not believe.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#29. To: Zipporah (#27)
You left out Methodists, Lutherans to name only two and all partial and full preterists in many denominations.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#30. To: Flintlock (#29)
#31. To: Dude Lebowski (#11)
Or what a dozen other proven hominid species mean relative to the Creation story and which one exactly was made in "God's image".
#32. To: Zipporah (#30)
I can give ya some more :P
Visa and MasterCard accepted
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#33. To: Flintlock (#32)
#34. To: Flintlock (#28)
Not at all, you're avoiding the question. The facts are that you and the rest of the rapture crowd are establishing doctrine on one single scripture (1Thes 4: 16-17).
Outside of a small minority of believers in this county, nobody else believes it.
#35. To: Zipporah (#33)
to name a few more.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#36. To: Starwind (#34)
Those who choose to disbelieve the rapture choose to ignore Paul's clear teaching on it
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#37. To: Flintlock (#35)
#38. To: Flintlock (#36)
You're right and everybody else is wrong; including some Orthodox Churches with well over 1500 years of history and study.
They didn't figure it out after studying the Bible for 1500 years but you and the Schofield/Moody crowd did in an afternoon.
#39. To: Zipporah (#37)
A few more?
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#40. To: Starwind (#38)
I believe the bible is right as written, and I don't know what everybody else thinks.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#41. To: Flintlock (#39)
#42. To: Flintlock (#40)
Cop out
#43. To: Flintlock, Starwind (#28)
#44. To: Starwind (#42)
Simple truth.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#45. To: Red Jones (#43)
ohn 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
#46. To: Red Jones (#43)
it is standard christian approach to insist that any idea in the bible, before it is accepted, be found more than once in the bible. To be mentioned only once is not important.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#47. To: Red Jones (#43)
but I remember reading one that supported it much better as I said.
#48. To: Flintlock, Red Jones (#46)
t is standard christian approach to insist that any idea in the bible, before it is accepted, be found more than once in the bible. To be mentioned only once is not important.
#49. To: Zipporah, Flintlock, Red Jones (#48)
On this I beg to differ. To build a doctrine on one passage is very flawed and as Flint pointed out ..two or more witnesses.
#50. To: Red Jones (#43)
There was a fellow who showed me several sets of verses that support it better than any of these.
#51. To: Zipporah (#45)
#52. To: Starwind (#47)
#53. To: Dude Lebowski (#50)
#54. To: Dude Lebowski (#50)
Jesus himself seemed to believe the second coming was imminent
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#55. To: Red Jones (#51)
#56. To: Zipporah (#55)
#57. To: Zipporah (#53)
#58. To: Starwind (#49)
or do you argue that some passages are not inspired by God, and if so, which ones please?
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#59. To: Zipporah (#53)
"But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God."
#60. To: Red Jones (#56)
And I do think that the end of this era will come, and that god will come down to earth and build his kingdom here on earth. You probably feel different, but that is OK with me. I certainly do appreciate your feedback regardless.
#61. To: Dude Lebowski (#59)
#62. To: Diana (#57)
#63. To: Flintlock (#58)
Are we going to talk about Muslims or not? I've asked you at least 4 other times and you haven't answered a simple question.
#64. To: Starwind (#63)
.. just go ahead and tell me what I think.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
.
.
.