Posted on 12/21/2004 1:20:03 PM PST by Pharmboy
CANA, Israel (AP) - Among the roots of ancient olive trees, archaeologists have found pieces of large stone jars of the type the Gospel says Jesus used when he turned water into wine at a Jewish wedding in the Galilee village of Cana. They believe these could have been the same kind of vessels the Bible says Jesus used in his first miracle, and that the site where they were found could be the location of biblical Cana. But Bible scholars caution it'll be hard to obtain conclusive proof - especially since experts disagree on exactly where Cana was located.
Christian theologians attach great significance to the water-to-wine miracle at Cana. The act was not only Jesus' first miracle, but it also came at a crucial point in the early days of his public ministry - when his reputation was growing, he had just selected his disciples and was under pressure to demonstrate his divinity.
The shards were found during a salvage dig in modern-day Cana, between Nazareth and Capernaum. Israeli archaeologist Yardena Alexander believes the Arab town was built near the ancient village. The jar pieces date to the Roman period, when Jesus traveled in the Galilee.
"All indications from the archaeological excavations suggest that the site of the wedding was (modern-day) Cana, the site that we have been investigating," said Alexander, as she cleaned the site of mud from winter rains.
However, American archaeologists excavating a rival site several miles to the north have also found pieces of stone jars from the time of Jesus, and believe they have found biblical Cana.
Another expert, archaeologist Shimon Gibson, cast doubt on the find at modern Cana, since such vessels are not rare and it would be impossible to link a particular set of vessels to the miracle.
"Just the existence of stone vessels is not enough to prove that this is a biblical site," and more excavations are needed, he said.
Based on the shards, Alexander believes the vessels found at her site were 12 to 16 inches in diameter - or large enough to be the same type of jars described in the Gospel of John.
Other evidence that might link the site to the biblical account includes the presence of a Jewish ritual bath at the house, which shows it was a Jewish community. Locally produced pottery was used at the simple house, showing it could have been from the poor village described in the Scriptures.
Stephen Pfann, a Bible scholar in Jerusalem, said that while the American dig has generally been accepted by scholars as the true site, the shards found in modern-day Cana raise new questions.
"I think there is ample evidence that both sites are from the first century, and we need more information to correctly identify either site," Pfann said.
Alexander has been digging in modern Cana since 1999.
The current find came in a last-ditch "salvage dig" before a house is built on the site. A Christian Arab family financed part of the excavation, in accordance with Israeli law, before construction can begin.
Alexander believes that with more substantial investment, the site could became a major tourist attraction and pilgrimage destination.
"We're really working very hard to save some of this site because what we do have here is a village of Jesus," she said. "And it was here that he carried out the first miracle."
AP-ES-12-21-04 1601EST
The found common stone jars, on a site which could possibly have been Cana, or maybe not.
Why would you even bring Jesus into it?
I completely understand your sudden urge to change the subject. I speak english.
Yardena is one woman's name. Usually in the English language we use the pronoun she. I don't know what they use in Romanian, Hungarian, or Russian to refer to a woman.
Well, I was guessing she was part of a team. Usually that's how these digs work. Is that really the best you've got? So you agree with me to the extent of the woman?
This Christian doesn't think alcohol is evil, but the way alcohol is used to excess in this society is. I don't drink at all, but not because I can't or because it would be wrong for me to, it wouldn't. "It would be like Jesus handing out pornography at a bachelor party; the belief doesn't make sense..."
A better comparison would be some Christians thinking sex is evil. But in fact, Jesus invented sex. Under the right conditions, sex is very very right and God encourages us in the Song of Solomon to "drink deeply". Under the wrong conditions, it is evil.
"She is a woman who speaks English."
I see. Thanks, I hadn't considered that.
Has anyone commented that the story does not even remotely support the headline, or some of the quotes? They don't even know it's Canna they've dug up, and they have no reason to believe these jars were used for the miracle.
=== Ah. Say no more.
No joke. I was wondering when we'd get to the punch line.
It is the abuse of alcohol and the problems it causes that leads to this thinking. I've heard a Pentecostal preacher say that though the Bible says "a little wine is good for the stomach", if you never indulge, you'll never overindulge.
It does make some sense.
Yes, I've heard it suggested that the wine was very weak, and therefore harmless. But even the cut wine was still much stronger than beer, and at this event in particular, we know they were already getting snookered. "Usually you serve the best wine first, then later [when the guests are too drunk to notice] you bring out something cheaper."
Grape Juice was invented in the late 1800s by Charles Welch, son of a presybyterian minister who believed alcohol to be immoral. His invention was intended to allow his father's congregation to participate in the Last Supper.
In contrast, the Catholic Church considers grape juice to be an invalid substance for transubstantiation, finding that the accidents of alchohol (formal accidents, not DUI accidents) are essential to the offering.
Ping to my last post. (somewhere around 190) re: modern invention of grape juice.
Maddog is not my idea of good wine..
Bring all the wine you can find made totally from pure water!
I doubt there is or ever have been any alcoholics as a result of drinking such wine regardless of the amount!
The fault of the Pharisees was that they had attempted to become righteous, but kept falling into sin. Hence, they moved to block all opportunities for accidentally sinning. Hence, the commandment "Thou shall not boil a calf in its mother's milk," became "You are not permitted to eat dairy and meat at the same meal." Thus, under the Pharisees, the Jews became heavily oppressed.
For this reason, the New Testament explicitly commands that we are not to add to the law, or lay religious burdens apon people. Telling people that they may not drink wine, when Jesus himself provided wine, is not only not sensible, it is downright sinful.
The Catholic Church tells people to avoid the near occasions of sin, but allows people to decide for themselves what such near occasions are. For the soul struggling against alcoholism, he may not enter a pub. Yet, for others, they may drink away. As Paul instructs us, extraordinary fasts and abstinences should not be imposed on others, nor should they be forbidden. (Before you even think it, joining the priesthood is a voluntary discipline.)
bump
the quote from the lead archeologist supports the title, I think.
Great Article..
Merry Christmas to you! and Best Wishes for a Bright Happy New Year!
But time will tell now won't it. Have an open mind that is how we all learn...:)
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.