Posted on 08/16/2004 9:09:34 AM PDT by technomage
AP: Group Discovers John the Baptist Cave
KIBBUTZ TZUBA, Israel (AP)
KARIN LAUB
Archaeologists said Monday they have found a cave where they believe John the Baptist anointed many of his disciples - a huge cistern with 28 steps leading to an underground pool of water.
During an exclusive tour of the cave by The Associated Press, archaeologists presented wall carvings they said tell the story of the fiery New Testament preacher, as well as a stone they believe was used for ceremonial foot washing.
They also pulled about 250,000 pottery shards from the cave, the apparent remnants of small water jugs used in baptismal ritual.
"John the Baptist, who was just a figure from the Gospels, now comes to life," said British archaeologist Shimon Gibson, who supervised the dig outside Jerusalem.
However, others said there was no proof that John the Baptist ever set foot in the cave, about 2 1/2 miles from Ein Kerem, the preacher's hometown and now part of Jerusalem.
"Unfortunately, we didn't find any inscriptions," said James Tabor, a religious studies professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Tabor and his students have participated in the excavations.
Both Tabor and Gibson said it was very likely that the wall carvings, including one showing a man with a staff and wearing animal skin, told the story of John the Baptist. The carvings stem from the Byzantine period and apparently were made by monks in the fourth or fifth century.
Gibson said he believed the monks commemorated John at a site linked to him by local tradition.
Gibson said the carvings, the foot washing stone and other finds, taken together with the proximity of John's hometown, constituted strong circumstantial evidence that the cave was used by John.
John, a contemporary of Jesus who also preached a message of redemption, is one of the most important figures in Christianity. The discovery, if confirmed, would be among the most significant breakthroughs for biblical scholars in memory.
The cave is on the property of Kibbutz Tzuba, an Israeli communal farm just outside Jerusalem. A member of the kibbutz, Reuven Kalifon, knew of the cave's existence - the community's nectarine orchards run right up to the mouth of the cave - but it was filled with soil almost to the ceiling.
In 1999, Kalifon asked Gibson to inspect the cave more closely.
The archaeologist, who has excavated in the Holy Land for three decades, crawled through the small opening and began removing boulders near the wall of the cave. When he pushed aside one of the stones, he saw a head carved into the wall - the top of the figure he believes depicts John.
Gibson, who heads the Jerusalem Archaeological Field Unit, a private research group, organized an excavation. During the five-year project, he wrote a book, entitled "The Cave of John the Baptist," to be published later this week.
Gibson said the cave - 24 yards long, around four yards wide and four yards deep - was carved in the Iron Age, somewhere between 800 and 500 B.C., by the Israelites who apparently used it as an immersion pool.
"It apparently was adopted by John the Baptist, who wanted a place where he could bring people to undergo their rituals, pertaining to his ideas of baptism," Gibson said.
Believers would have walked down 28 stone steps. To their right, they would have discarded their clothes in a niche carved into the wall.
At the bottom of the steps, they would have placed the right foot onto a stone with an imprint of a foot. A small depression to the right of the imprint would have contained oil, to be poured over the foot for cleansing, Gibson said.
You can certainly discern "respect" from worship, can't you. As the Pharisee's did to Jesus, you are trying to do to me.
Genuflecting as to a "bow" in respect...That is why Hebrews couldn't "Bow" to other Kings who wish to be treated as Gods...
I would say you really are trying to hide something here.
Catechism says the church forbids such activity, yet it condones it in actions...Meaning, no one stops the people from doing it.
Nothing to hide her Zavien. Check out your Catholic facts before attacking. You will be a much happier person once you know the truth.
Open your Bible and read, it is quite the enlightening experience.
You just might learn something.
Yes, however there is nothing scriptural about baptising babies. Nor is it needed to get into heaven.
The Shroud, if its veracity is to be believed, is a relic of Jesus Christ.
As such, since it claims only to be an image, a trace of another being who is indeed a deity, no one who takes the Shroud seriously can worship it.
There were Thousands that worshipped a staff with a serpant on it in the wilderness (Moses;Exodus)...
Again, as with the comment about Simon Peter, you demonstrate that you merely skim Scripture without reading it carefully. Scripture does not mention anyone in the wilderness worshipping the staff.
It is only centuries later that Israelites began to confuse this instrument of Moses with the false god Nehushtan.
Thousands that worshipped a golden calf... Millions worship a gravesite (Mecca)
Of course. However, pointing out that other objects have become idolatrous does not mean that all are the objects of idolatrous worship.
The Lord ordained that his own Ark be adorned with images of cherubim, yet we do not read in Scripture that these cherubim became the objects of idolatry.
Don't tell me there isn't ONE person that would worship the shroud.
Barring clinical insanity. After all, as i stated above, the Shroud claims only to be a remnant and a trace of a larger reality. If you believe the Shroud to have value, it only has value in reference to the God of whom it is a trace. To worship it in and of itself, you would have to think that the Shroud's claims about itself are false. yet the only thing about the Shroud that inspires people to pay any attention to it is the belief in the veracity of its claims.
Worship of the Shroud is therefore a logical contradiction.
This I know to be false.
You demonstrate again and again complete ignorance of all things Catholic.
No Catholic I ever heard of, whether still in the Church or out of it, would ever say the ignorant things about it you routinely say.
Why?
>> The Shroud, had it been Jesus's Shroud, Peter would have noticed something with the burial clothes in the tomb.<<
Why? The bible makes no mention of Peter unravelling the dressings.
>> Secondly, It wouldn't be out of character for the Roman Catholic Church to devise material to make converts. <<
How do relics gain converts? "A-Ha! Thomas' finger! This PROVES the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception!" ????
I've more often seen atrocious anti-Catholic claims made by finders of relics, such as "James'" Ostuary.
the only claims to it are from those that hold it...
The research done on it says it is from the 5th century, that would be 500 years AFTER Jesus.
Believe the voracity of the claims if you want, I'll keep my eyes on Jesus and not worry about what some "snake oil" a church is trying to sell me.
and even after the day of pentacost, there isn't any mention of the burial clothes, nor is there any time during the new testament, which the earliest book we found dates to 70 a.d....
Go figure...
You are spinning. I'm putting the facts out there. You're the one whose argument implies that a waltz is actually an act of idolatrous worship.
You can certainly discern "respect" from worship, can't you.
Apparently the prophet Nathan was able to discern that when he bowed before King David he was showing respect, not showing him idolatrous worship.
As the Pharisee's did to Jesus, you are trying to do to me.
In no way am I trying to get you to make a statement that would be considered seditious by government authorities. Try again.
Genuflecting as to a "bow" in respect...
Catholics aren't permitted to genuflect to relics. If you had ever been a Catholic, as you falsely claim, you would know this. Keep making embarrassing mistakes.
That is why Hebrews couldn't "Bow" to other Kings who wish to be treated as Gods...
Yet they could bow to their own kings. Interesting. That means that bowing is not inherently an act of worship, but that it depends entirely on context.
I would say you really are trying to hide something here.
What am I hiding? I'm a Roman Catholic who considers the Shroud of Turin to be an authentic relic of the Lord Jesus Christ.
You're the one who evidently has something to hide . . . why the need to make up little lies about Simon Peter's interaction with Jesus' burial garments? Why was that fib necessary? Why lie about Israelites in the wilderness worshipping the staff? Unless, of course, you just don't care enough about Scripture to read it carefully.
Thomas's finger, pieces of the Cross and the Tablet with the chrages are located at the Prison where paul was supposed to have stayed, before he was beheaded.
Immaculate conception? Mary had other children...Read Matthew and Luke again...
>> Also, If you 'bow' to anything it is worshipping that item.<<
Things Protestants must worship then:
Kings
Funerals
Their dance partners
Low-hanging braches
To worship was to place oneself in the service of another. Bowing was a sign of this. It was not considered improper to bow before one who was himself in the service of God (A king like David or a Levite priest), or an artifact which was sacred. This was because it was understood that the person was worshipping not what he bowed before, but God. Please note that Moses created a serpent/seraphim, and had it placed on a staff. Those who bowed before the seraphim were cured. This was not idolatry, but was commanded before God. Likewise, people bowed as they entered the Holy Temple.
This isn't a place for me to argue about theology, and niether of us is going to back down on thier faith. So, let it be...
If not, Kerry will reveal that he saved John the Baptist from drowning while he was with a small group of Swift Boat Veterans who patrolled the Jordan River.
>>That is why Hebrews couldn't "Bow" to other Kings who wish to be treated as Gods.<<
They did bow to their OWN kings, because their own kings were in service to The LORD. They would not bow before alien Kings because the alien Kings were in service to pagan Gods, or considered themselves as God.
I said that already
Off topic.
"yelling at us for our underaged drinking."
I didn't seem like it was a big deal back then, like it is now. I wonder what the stats are for percentages of kids who ended up w/a problem then vs. now?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.