It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Biblical Pool of Siloam Is Uncovered in Jerusalem!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2005 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Biblical Pool of Siloam Is Uncovered in Jerusalem
Tue Aug 09 2005 00:09:33 ET

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, the LOS ANGELES TIMES reports.

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, according to Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archeology 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.

The discovery puts a new spotlight on what is called the pilgrimage to Jerusalem, a trip that religious law required ancient Jews to make 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 A.D. 400 and 460 by the empress Eudocia of Byzantium, who oversaw the rebuilding of several Biblical sites.

Developing...



Well just one more case of the Bible being right I would presume.......



DRUDGE




posted on Aug, 8 2005 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Great find Ed.

Thanks for sharing.



[edit on 8-8-2005 by joyouslyhumored]



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Thanks I always like it when that Book turns out to be right, and the pundits wrong.




posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Thanks I always like it when that Book turns out to be right, and the pundits wrong.



It will forever puzzle me, that when we're right, it's BIG NEWS!



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 06:20 AM
link   
They found a pond? This is incredible. Ed, would you please do the honours of converting me yourself? Like, right here and now? I've seen all I need to see.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Very interesting if true,

However there is no link in any archeolgical sites. In addition no israel or arab stations have covered the story:

Before you take this with the same truth as vendyl supposedly raising the Ark, just proven to be a Scam and fraud, Well maybe ed provide a relable link i could find none. Until then as said above theve found a pond or some underwater aquifers, big deal there very very normaal in that part of the world due to the geography and geoligy of the region, Remeber guys most of the area is desertfied, without abundant underwater supplies of water no settlements would have evetr been placed there.

Just another natural phenominum, until proper sources confirm this.

Regards

Elf



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Every time is a hole digged in Jerusalem and some ruins found is taken by religous rights as prove of the "christ" the truth is that in the ancient Jewish traditions this pools were used around the cities to wash before entering the temples.

So what is the big deal, Jerusalem is after all the ancient site for the Jewish nation.

Jerusalem was destroyed around 70 AD, and temples of Roman deities were build on top of the ruins of christian and jewish sites.

After constantino took the city 200 years later his mother had these temples again destroy and replace with christian sites of worship.

Let's not forget that Romans also favored pools and bathed offen not for purification like the jewish tradition but for recreations and sanitation.

The pool can be Roman also.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Joh 5:2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.
Joh 5:3 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.
Joh 5:4 For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.
Joh 5:5 And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years.
Joh 5:6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?
Joh 5:7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.
Joh 5:8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.


and

Joh 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
Joh 9:6 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,
Joh 9:7 And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.
Joh 9:8 The neighbors therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged?
Joh 9:9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.
Joh 9:10 Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened?
Joh 9:11 He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight.

I guess the 'big deal' is this:

Many of you reading this love to say that the bible is a bunch of fables. One big lie. The fact is however, that the bible is an accurate presentation of history. It was once said by the nay sayers that it (the bible) was completely false. The people mentioned were fake, or the accounts attributed to them were later made up.

So far, we know that David and Solomon (among others) are real. Cant deny it. We know that Hezzy was real, because we found his tunnel. We know that the pool is real, because we found the tunnel and the pool. We know who built it, because the bible tells us.
Now you want to say that all cultures had pools like this. Thats incorrect when you consider the above passages.
You cannot deny the pool exists,
or that the jews built it
so you will instead, try to cast doubt (is this REALLLY that pool?) and deny that Christ was there.

The coins, the history of Rome...all point to this as authentic. It is likely Herod the Great's refirbished construction.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Nobody is deniying the history of the jewish people and as part of history the bible books refer to the city of the time, so what is the big deal?

One thing is to refer to sites that were in existance during the bible times but another to created myth alone the lines to justify the existance of one particular deity, the Christ.

After all the Christ was a jewish follower of the religion and as a believer of jewish tradition he most had used the pools around the city to wash.

And so all the thousands of Jewish people of the time. Funny such an important even that happen on that particular "pool" and by such and important man of bible recollection is only to be found in the bible.

The pool or pools may exist and so all the areas in Jerusalem of the time still buried under rubble after all queen Helena made sure that all the christian sites were found under her supervision.
She was a cristian follower after all she made sure that even if the body of the Christ was never found at least the places he "walked" were.

So the place was never lost just buried under some rubble.


[edit on 13-8-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

So what is the big deal, Jerusalem is after all the ancient site for the Jewish nation.

Jerusalem was destroyed around 70 AD, and temples of Roman deities were build on top of the ruins of christian and jewish sites.


I thought it was Palestinian? What do you mean that the jews actually were a nation long before Palestine?



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
I thought it was Palestinian? What do you mean that the jews actually were a nation long before Palestine?




The jewish, Israel or whatevern was a nation with no land, by the way and I never said that they were a nation before the palestine, so I don't see where you are going with this.

They regarded themselves as a nation.

We are talking about "holy sites" not the "palestine and the Isreali, or jewish or whatever" promise land and how they took over by the will of the jewish "God"


[edit on 13-8-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Nice find ed
. well marg, your understanding of christianity leaves something to be desired. anyway, i find it amuzing how many will deny Jesus and claim it to be lies unto the end times when its too late to realise you were wrong. One thing that really angers me is mention something from the new testament and all these lefties are up in arms about it being false. Had this been in the koran they would believe it without a doubt.
Just shows their favoritism.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Nice find ed
. well marg, your understanding of christianity leaves something to be desired.


Sure, nice try, lets see what the next hole in the ground in Jerusalem will yeld, perhap we will find the entrance to heaven.


Every time something in the "holy land" gets discovered it has to be "holy" Right?

Because the bible tells you so.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Nice find ed
. well marg, your understanding of christianity leaves something to be desired.


Sure, nice try, lets see what the next hole in the ground in Jerusalem will yeld, perhap we will find the entrance to heaven.


Every time something in the "holy land" gets discovered it has to be "holy" Right?

Because the bible tells you so.



NO marg not at all, it just reaffirms that the Book is factual and therefore truthful.


Many say things can not be as the Bible says and then low and behold...it was exactly as the Bible said...



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

NO marg not at all, it just reaffirms that the Book is factual and therefore truthful.
Many say things can not be as the Bible says and then low and behold...it was exactly as the Bible said...


No ed it only prove that the bible was written always after the facts. never before but always after.

I you are redacting history and pinning the history to certain events if better to stay geographycaly as close to the source.

Is no doubt that many sites in ancient Jerusalem existed but the myth to pin events to one particular event or deity is what the problem is.

The pool is or may be real that is a fact, historical fact, but the events sourrounding the pool and his link to one particular person or deity is what can become questionable.

The NT was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, people accounts of certain places were still in the memory of the peole that lived in the area and their decendends, it is easier to write down a particular story or even and create a mythical figure to enhance the story, in other worlds writting about Jesus and what he did in places that were real would make the bible look more credible.

Real historical accounts will tell that even when the area of jerusalem of the bible can be verify in other books and records kept at the time . . .but

Only the bible put Jesus in those places.

That is a fact.

Jerusalem was destryed around 70 AD, Pagan temples were erected on major christian and Jewish sites, by 90 AD jewish were banned from Jerusalem.

For 200 years it was under Roman control.

Then Constantino conquered the area and his mother queen Helena revived the Christian sites by then 200 years of Roman domination and deities were scatered on the shape of temples all over the city.

Every where somebody digs in Jerusalem they are "Going to find ancient ruins."

Putting Jesus amont these sites and ruins is the easiest part. After all Constantino and his mother put christianity and the Christ where is today.

And the NT came shortly after.

With all the Glory and divinity.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
First of all, Josephus puts Jesus in Jerusalem.


Second Isaiah was written long before Mary and Joseph.....your history is mistaken.

The Dream of Nebacenezzer foretold things to come long before they were reality..


Its faith you lack, history speaks for itself.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
First of all, Josephus puts Jesus in Jerusalem.


Josephus writtings on the history of the jewish people as a jewish person himself had jesus littler quote after his writtings "Where traduced by the Church"

Taking in consideration that Josephus wrote entire pages of the major figures of the time linked to the history of the jewish people his littler quote of "Jesus" looks lame and insignificant.

Many schoolars don't even take the so call "Quote" as even been written by him.

The language used on the quote do not match the words of Josephus but more the language of the church.



Second Isaiah was written long before Mary and Joseph.....your history is mistaken.



Will you place a link of passage to this please.



The Dream of Nebacenezzer foretold things to come long before they were reality..


When. . . before of after the bible redactions by the church.? Actually the so call stories of the future were written after the facts.



Its faith you lack, history speaks for itself.


Oh, don't get me wrong I love ancient sites and ruins and I have not doubt the ancient pools were part of the Jewish history and they were scatered all over Jerusalem to be used before entering the temples.

Roman used pools and baths also after all 200 years of Roman domination the poor Romans needed places to bath. he,he,

But this are facts and easily found in historical accounts beside the bible ones.

I have no problem with that. But the christ that is another story, that I will keep my faith were it is.


After all the whole purpose of the Christian bible is to link in time and history the Christ, without that, Christians will not have the Christ and neither the Jewish God of the bible as his father.

Right ed?

Yes my historical accounts and knowledge are baseless and without faith. What can I say.

But I am interested in Archeological sites.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Marg, I really dont see the point you are trying to make saying it was a Roman bath, because they found 4 coins (with a metal detector) found imbeded in the plaster of the steps with the imprint of Alexander Jannaeus who was a jewish king who ruled jeruselam from 103 to 76 BC. and several other coins found dating to the first jewish revolt of rome in 66 to 70 ad when it is historcally known to be abandoned and mud started filling the pool, and now is filled in some places in 10 feet of mud.

Romans really never had a chance to use it as a public bath, or 'gymnasium'

The simple matter is, there STILL has never been any archeological evidance that contradicts the bible. Thus proving the Bible still can be used as an accurate histroical document



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
Romans really never had a chance to use it as a public bath, or 'gymnasium'

The simple matter is, there STILL has never been any archeological evidance that contradicts the bible. Thus proving the Bible still can be used as an accurate histroical document


And I agree with you, yes I do, finding acient sites mention in the bible is not problem, we all know that the bible "Have historical Value" for the jewish people at least the OT, and for people that are "Christians" but accurate and irrefutable I have my doubts on that, I always said that "who else that the Jewish people of the time to know their geography and own historical accounts"

Now tales and stories that accompany most of the places in ancient sites link to certain events and particular people that doesn't appear any where else but in the bible, that is my problem.

Archeological sites are interesting places to gather information as the time of certain well know events in history.

But to pin these particular places to benefit stories, myth, lore and believes as irrefutable prof of it is something I have not problem questioning.

Beside that anything discovered in the middle east has always been facinating and more power to the people of the area.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 11:36 AM
link   
First you say the pool could have been roman, which it cannot be since at the time of the pools construction, and eventual disuse there was a Jewish King of jeruselam. At the time the only hold rome had over jeruselam was via it's military and governer (prefect) who commanded Roman military units, authorized construction projects, arranged for the collection of imperial taxes, and decided civil and criminal cases.

Since the majority of people living in jeruselam were not roman citizans, it is just being badly misinformed to assume the pool was roman

Now you are saying becuase the jews of the first centuray AD wrote history about themselves, it should be concidered inaccurate on that fact alone?

I would ask you besides jews and christians who, at the time, would bother record anything about a pool in jeruselam that a bunch of cripples would lay around waiting for the waters to be stirred so they could get healed? We're talking about a place that at the time was in the edges of the roman empire and probly was only good for them as a crossroads of the middle-east to collect taxes and tolls on.

in the absense of solid evidance to the contray we have to assume that in fact the events recorded in the bible are in fact wholly true and accurate.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join