John the Baptist's rituals cave found in wilderness

[emad]

Snip from Times
By Dalya Alberge, Arts Correspondent



A BRITISH archaeologist has uncovered evidence for the existence of John the Baptist that could have a huge impact on Christian history.
Shimon Gibson, 45, who has been excavating sites in Israel and the Occupied Territories over many years, has discovered a cave west of Jerusalem with a ritual baptism pool, rock carvings and pottery, which he has linked to John the Baptist and his followers.

The extraordinary discovery was revealed to The Times yesterday ahead of an international press conference tomorrow, when his findings will be announced at the cave. The unusually large cave — 24m (79ft) by 3.5m (11.5ft) — is close to the village of Ain Karim, the Baptist’s traditional birthplace according to early Christian sources. It was also the area in which he spent his youth and early adult life.

Dr Gibson said that a figure holding a staff that is reminiscent of representations of the Baptist in early Byzantine art is among images primitively incised into the rock during the 4th and 5th centuries, by which time the cave had become a shrine to the Baptist. Speaking from Israel, Dr Gibson said: “I am now certain that this cave was connected with the ancient cult of John the Baptist. Indeed, this may very well be ‘the’ cave of the early years of John’s life, the place where he sought his first solitude in the ‘wilderness’ and the place where he practised his baptisms.”

Religious leaders were excited by news of the discovery but few have so far been allowed into the cave because there was concern that thousands of pilgrims would descend on the site before the excavation had finished.
More:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1217975,00.html

[truthisfreedom]

1. "...the place where he practised his baptisms.” so did he practice them

enough to make them a little less scary? i remember mine... i thought i'd drown.

[emad]

3. Lucky your folks didn't opt for the other version...Baptism by Fire!

Now THAT could make a lasting impression on someone....

[randome]

4. LOL! The first few "experiments"...

...are probably buried nearby.

[elehhhhna]

2. They've translated the text on the walls---

It says "Vote For Bush/Cheney! I am John The Baptist and I approved this message".

[emad]

7. Translation:

Waving his torch over the surface, he saw the outline of an arm with the fingers of the hand outstretched as if in greeting, and next to it a large cross. The 0.7m carving depicts a man in a rigid frontal pose that is typical of Byzantine-period iconography.
Dr Gibson, who believes that the carvings were done by Byzantine monks, said: “Renderings of John in baptism scenes always show him using the right arm for blessing and with his staff clutched in his left hand or leaning against his left arm.”

The most startling find was the ritual baptism pool — large enough to have accommodated up to 30 people. Dr Gibson has excavated several purification pools in and around Jerusalem. In contrast to this one, the others were small, for individual purification before eating or prayers, for example. Flavius Josephus, the 1st-century Jewish historian, wrote of the Baptist’s unusual baptism practices which included the renunciation of sins within groups.

An international team of experts used forensic-science techniques to decipher evidence offered in pottery, coins, pieces of cloth and remains of a ritual fire. There were signs of rituals from the 1st century including large quantities of pottery which appear to have been broken as part of a ceremony. The inner end of the cave had been used for baptism and the front for rituals involving stone circles and a stone for foot anointing. Evidence suggests that the cave was used until the 11th century as a shrine. Dr Gibson said: “I think that there must have been a strong oral tradition linking this cave to the story of St John the Baptist. With the coming of the Crusaders in the 12th century, this tradition, like many others in the hills of Jerusalem, was disrupted.”

Dr Gibson, who trained at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, and whose publications include an archaeological encyclopaedia of the Holy Land, publishes his findings in The Cave of John the Baptist on Thursday. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1217975_2,00.html

[notadmblnd]

38. Wasn't John the Baptist beheaded before Christ was executed?

and just when did the cross become a symbol of christianity? sounds to me like somebody has been playing in Johns cave.

[truthisfreedom]

8. wait a gol-darned minute... don't bush and cheney burst into flame when

you get them wet, like the wicked witch?

[emad]

9. Hope so...

?

[Barrett808]

14. LOL! n/t

[Isere]

21. LOL!!!!!!!

Great riposte!

[lastliberalintexas]

36. No, that would have been Paul's cave

John the Baptist actually spoke truth to the powers of the day, and his actions cost him his life. He wouldn't be in cahoots with the repubs of today. But then again, neither would Jesus!

[gatlingforme]

5. Interesting article, Thanks for the post. I will be following this..

[emad]

6. Snip2:

Dr Gibson, whose excavation was sponsored by the University of North Carolina in America, said he expects the cave to become a shrine again to the Baptist. Until now, he noted, pilgrims have been able to visit only two nearby churches dedicated to him. Apart from 16th and 17th-century paintings, there has been nothing as substantial as a site with such a direct link to the man who was to baptise Christ in the River Jordan.

Dr Gibson said the cave contained archaeological remains from the time of the personalities and events described in the Gospels: “For the first time, we can point to a spot and say it is highly likely that this is where John the Baptist was baptising and undertaking his rituals. That is amazing.”

The cave’s entrance had been almost obscured by thorn bushes when Dr Gibson was asked by the local kibbutz, on whose land it is situated, to look inside. Initially, the only way to enter was by sliding in feet first. He was then confronted by the rock portrait. “I sensed I was on the verge of making a major archaeological discovery. I could feel tingling in my hands,” he said.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1217975,00.html
Sorry pay-site...but I'm a subscriber...

[Maddy McCall]

11. Sounds like this "archaeologist" is a little too invested in his faith...

...to exercise judicious objectivity.

[kimchi]

13. Exactly what I thought.

And the poster below is correct too...proving the time period is not proving that J the B actually worked there!

Sounds like this archaeologist might have an agenda. After Ron Wyatt, I'm pretty sceptical of those intent on proving the Bible.

[patcox2]

17. And likewise, your predisposition to doubt colors your objectivity.

But the great thing about the practice of "history" as developed in western academe is that his viewpoint will be thrown out into the academic arena to be examined, dissected, and if necessary, refuted, and eventually a consensus will emerge.

You will note he admits freely that he believes john the baptist to have existed. But he is also objective enough that he never claims that he has proof of John the Baptist actually having done anything there, read his words, he carefully distinguishes when he says he is "certain" that it was a scene of later cult activity, whereas it is possible that it may have been a scene of John the Baptist activity.

In any event, there is more reason to beleive the baptist existed than that he didn't; my poor recollection is that there are actually more historical references to the Baptist than to Jesus.

And besides that, the "embarrassment principle" strongly argues that the Baptist existed. If he didn't, the early christians would not have created him. After all, what purpose does a mythical Baptist serve? The son of God and messiah certainly would not require the imprimatur or approval of some fringe prophet, would he? Why muddy the waters with stories of some competing prophet, if you are just making it up? Yet the gospels all start with John the Baptist, and any kind of an intelligent and sceptical reading of them suggests that this was a deliberate effort by the early christians to recruit into their ranks the followers of the baptist, who were probably a completely distinct sect at that point. If you are willing to speculate a little, it appears to me that Jesus was originally a follower of the Baptist, and led a splinter sect which branched off from the cult of the Baptist, and invented the "not fit to tie his shoes" story in order to establish the legitimacy of Jesus in the eyes of the followers of John the baptist. None of this theory would be considered daring in a seminary, by the way, even a catholic seminary.

As to the existence of Jesus and the Baptist, well, umm, its just the nature of any "cult of personality" that there was originally a personality that inspired the cult, you know what I mean? I can't think of any succesful cult which purports to follow the teachings of a person which was actually created by a committee which secretly conspired to create a mythical person, can you? Joseph Smith existed, L. Ron Hubbard existed. Zoroaster most likely existed, as did the Buddha and Confucius.

People love to cite Occams razor, yet its always thrown out the window when it comes to christianity. We have thousands of examples of large movements started by real people, yet everyone is so ready to presume that christianity is a truly remarkable and rare phenomenon, a wildly succesful secret conspiracy.

[kimchi]

49. nevermind

You weren't responding to me.

[Teaser]

18. Why?

n/t

[patcox2]

20. Because objectivity is an unachievable ideal, silly.

Of course everyone strives for objectivity, but its not possible to eliminate one's biases. The professor who is publishing his finds may well start from a bias towards beleiving the Baptist was a real person, and the poster I was responding to starts from a bias towards beleiving the baptist was not a real person. There is in fact a large body of scholarly work on the issue, of course, but I could not say I am familiar with it. Nevertheless I can say that starting from the assumption that John the Baptist never existed is in fact a bias in light of the literature.

[gatlingforme]

15. Thanks for this too. Very interesting.... and it does sound a little

too good to be true type of stuff, but you never know..

[psychopomp]

10. This is very interesting

John the Baptist was a precurser to Jesus and had a profound effect on the young evangelist. Both Jews who broke away from the orthadox path, they had a profound effect on each other.

Please excuse me if the above seems like an understatement.

[asthmaticeog]

12. "connected with the ancient cult of John the Baptist"

Demonstrating the existence of a cult of the Baptist is a loooong way from proving the existence of the Baptist.

I'm jus' sayin'.

[On the Road]

16. No More Reason to Doubt the Existence of John

than of the Buddha. I understand there's still a remnant of the Baptist cult in Iraq, called the Mandeans. This is very, very exciting. It will also shed light on the early Jewish followers of Jesus, which may be quite different from Paul's church.

[NashVegas]

25. Or Dionysis?

still plenty of cult members for that one :)

[Thor_MN]

19. In a related story, Nantucket discovered

The existence of legendary Island of Nantucket, the site where Ishmael and Queequeg joined the the Pequod, captained by Ahab has been proven. The equal famous Cape Cpd is, as yet, unfound, but hopes are high that it will be discovered nearby. The remains of a wooden dock clearly indicate whaling activity and could even be "the Dock" at which Ishmael first glimpsed the Pequod.

[DivinBreuvage]

22. Did you know that most boats in human history sailed without people?

We have no names, no birth certificates, no paystubs, no ship's logs, no bodies, no nothing. Hence there is absolutely no reason to believe that most Greek or Roman ships, for example, ever had anybody on board.

[bleedingheart]

24. Romans kept a lot of records and there are logs of ships

and the cargo they had...I am sure that there are paystubs of sorts..at least some sort of record of payment.

...and last but not least the wealthier Romans/Greeks had tombs that provided names, dates and even their titles in life.

[DivinBreuvage]

27. A spurious argument worthy of Jerry Falwell.

Those supposed "logs" you refer to could be fraudulent fictions concocted for insurance purposes; and even if they are genuine, unless you can give me some sailor's names we are still forced to conclude that those ships sailed unmanned.

And you're "sure" paystubs exist? Under what principle of science does being "sure" about the existence of imaginary evidence matter?

Furthermore, the existence of a handful of records from ancient Rome hardly proves the existence of Phoenician sailors or Chippewa Indians who paddled birchbark canoes.

(I'm not really trying to run you down, I'm just trying to show that the arguments of some people on this thread really don't hold water).

[bobbyboucher]

28. Handful?

How much is a handful of records?

[DivinBreuvage]

29. A small amount considerably less than the total. Or are you claiming

that all, or even a majority, of Roman shipping logs have survived? Sounds like a big claim to me, forgive me for being sceptical.

[bobbyboucher]

33. Not claiming that at all, claiming this:

You don't know dick, so shove the condescention.

[DivinBreuvage]

34. Well, now, that's BRILLIANT. You must think you're the next Einstein.

What's the matter, too hard to marshal actual facts to support your case? You "true believers" always get so hysterical and violent when someone points out the truth to you.

[patcox2]

35. Your standard of proof with regard to facts is unreasonable.

And shows an ignorance of the general level of corroboration for accepted historical study when dealing with events 2000 years ago. And you compound it with your assumptions and logical, but false deductions about the nature of historicity judgments when dealing with antiquity.

[DivinBreuvage]

41. You take my argument far too literally (and have a poor ear for sarcasm)

My real point is this:

Many self-proclaimed sceptics (not all of them, of course) have just as much unobjective emotional and psychological investment in their point of view as adherents of faith do -- a fact that you yourself touch on in your excellent posts #17 and #20 on this thread. Despite their claim to possess greater enlightenment, greater intelligence, or an "unchained mind" that has been liberated by their supposed reliance on cold rationality, they are in fact just as enslaved by their worldview, just as dependent on its use as a psychological security blanket, as the adherents of faith they are pleased to mock and decry.

I am speaking of the kind of sceptic who is actually frightened and threatened by the suggestion that a Biblical figure may have existed. To such people it is not sufficient to say, "Jesus Christ was neither God nor the Son of God, nor did he rise from the dead, because there is no evidence that such things occur; he was simply a regular human being." To such people it becomes a psychological imperative to insist that the Bible is wholly false and that Jesus did not exist at all, because the mere idea that there may really have been a core of historical truth at the center of these religious fables is too much for them to handle; it shakes the secure foundation of their cherished prejudice. When they are questioned, they frequently display the same behavior as religious literalists, becoming troubled, angry, and defensive.

As you yourself point out, they are compelled to hold even John the Baptist, a mortal man for whom no extraordinary supernatural claims are made, to a higher standard of historical proof than they are willing to extend to Imhotep, Socrates, or Roman sailors -- because John is named in the Bible, and that's scary.

Despite recent findings that suggest the carbon-dating of the Shroud of Turin was flawed and that the cloth does indeed come from first-century Palestine, I fully expect many of these people -- self-professed devotees of "rationality" and "science" -- to cling desperately to the bad science of the invalidated carbon date and insist that the Shroud is absolutely, positively, a fourteenth-century medieval forgery because "the carbon dating says so". Why? The mere fact that the cloth dates from the time and place of Christ (if indeed it does) does not prove in any way that the figure on it is Jesus Christ; and even if it were Christ it doesn't prove that anything miraculous happened to him. It's just sweat and bacteria stains on a cloth, a phenomenon which can easily be reproduced by anyone who wishes to try. But again, upholding the inviolability of their belief becomes more important than dealing with the actual truth of the matter, and they will twist logic and science in a desperate effort to do so.

In short, they are exactly like Biblical literalists who must categorically deny the findings of geology and paleontology lest the foundations crack and the walls come tumbling down.

[patcox2]

42. I got you two mixed up.

Reading the argument, I missed that your last post was sarcasm, I just read the post and thought you were the other guy. Ooops. Must be the effect of religious insanity and being inherently stupid because of my beleif in supersition.

[DivinBreuvage]

43. I'm a believer in "superstition" too, and side with you on this argument

Though my writing is so sublimely subtle that that might not be immediately apparent :)

[bobbyboucher]

48. Wrong again.

Not subtle at all. Obvious.

[patcox2]

45. The "faith" in human exceptionalism

If you hold your nose and debate this issue with a fundamentalist non-beleiver, eventually you hit the wall when you see that they are almost completely oblivious when it comes to ontology and epistomology and the fundamental questions of reality and knowledge. In the end they beleive that the human race has the superhuman power to perceive and understand everything in the universe. This is fundamentally necessary to them because in order to maintain their "faith" in positive disbeleif (as opposed to mere agnosticism or even scepticism), they have to argue that it is possible to disprove something that is unknowable. Since this is logically impossible, their cognitive dissonance forces them to argue that nothing is unknowable to man, which is pretty near to saying man is god.

[Cat Atomic]

50. What do you mean by "a fundamentalist non-believer"?

I've never met anyone who insists that there is no god and that human beings can understand all things. I've met plenty of atheists, though.

It's my experience that the only people claiming to have all the answers are fundamentalist theists.

[bobbyboucher]

47. You are so.......

deep.

[bobbyboucher]

46. "True believers", "hysterical" and "violent"

Three more mistakes. Keep up the good work.

[DivinBreuvage]

51. Bobby, your Promethean intellect absolutely SCINTILLATES!

Your devastating counterarguments are positively irrefutable! Your iron-clad logic dazzles with the rhetorical beauties of an Abelard and the philosophical penetration of a Socrates. Keep up the good work and you will make the junior high debate team for sure -- when you get to junior high.

[emad]

54. Best kept secret in Christendom: it was John the B not Jesus of

Nazareth who was "The Christ". Endless schizms and splits from Copts, Greek, Russian, Serb etc Orthodox chapters all rooted in this.

[bleedingheart]

23. The cave could be a 4th Century tourist trap

I am not pooh poohing the possible existence of John the Baptist but I do think that this cave may have well been "selected" by converts to Christianity so that they could create an early shrine. With more money in their coffers they later built churches instead of having the worshippers go to a cave...

Just cuz there is artwork on the walls doesn't mean it really was the place John practiced his craft.

Now it will become a 21st century tourist trap for religious folks and history/archaeology fans.

[spinbaby]

30. Hah! You're probably right.

Maybe if they keep digging, they'll find the official Children's Crusade Commemorative John the Baptist Souvenir Plate.

[patcox2]

31. Read it again, thats all the guy said it was.

All the guy said was that it was a 4th century cult site, in essence, a tourist trap. He only said that it "could be" the site where John the Baptist practiced, but his claim for certainty was limited to the later use.

[bleedingheart]

37. I agree, it is still kind of a cool thing to discover

no matter what it is...any ancient sites which allow us to catch a glimpse of our history are interesting.

[Mari333]

26. and I am the Queen of England n/t

[Voltaire99]

32. Unbelievers! Just try to refute his diary entry...

...complaining of dish-pan hands.

[JFreitas]

39. Title of article is misleading

I am a trained historian, even though I haven't "practiced" in 15 years or so, and my area of expertise was "patristics" or the study of the early church fathers. I have gone from being predisposed towards the objective existence of Jesus et. al., to not really admitting it, and back to somewhat being open to admit there was something going on. Still:

To the great surprise of many, there are virtually no independent corroborations of the existence of Jesus. I say virtually because something may have come up in the last few years since I last checked. No contemporary roman records, no archeological evidence, nothing. Even the first complete new testament text dates from the year 400 something and perhaps 500 and something (sorry, can't be more precise, but do a search on Constantinople Bible). Until that date we have pieces and fragments but really no sure agreement on a story and on a set of texts.

The methods used to date a find like the one mentioned are very inexact in the sense that using stylistical items such as pottery type, writing, and so on, produces a "larger window" than that of a the lifetime of one single person. Short of an incription saying something like "x was here during the reign of y or in the year of z" the best that you can usually say is "datable from the year 0 to the year 200" or something along these lines. And yes, many actual roman sailors did leave messages in various places, with names and little sayings like "May Neptune take care of me when I board the so and so, bound to Alexandria" or even just "Marcus Odorus arrived here on the Nautilus from Crete!". Killroy was an ubiquitous traveller and he went lots of places on roman ships (I don't know about greek ones though, so those may have been crewless - or clueless... :-))

So the reasoning could be circular. It could be a cave from the year 150 used by people who believed they were following in the footsteps of John the Baptist and decided to create a place "just like the one he had".

So I actually think that someone saying that the discovery of a cave like that one tends to prove that John existed is somewhat misleading, perhaps on purpose. The whole field of Biblical archeology and research is full of propaganda and historical manipulations for goals that will further present day causes, a sure recipe for strong bias possibilities (this goes for the atheists or non-believers also, naturally).

No offense meant to anyone.

José de Freitas
Portugal

[jbm]

52. Welcome to DU JFreitas!

and thanks for your post. I'm always amazed at how much knowledge exists on these boards.

[ewagner]

56. Welcome to DU

Great post.

:hi:

[mainer]

40. After the hoax with Jesus's brother's fake ossuary...

Take all of this with a grain of salt. Some people are so hungry to believe the Bible, they'll believe ANY evidence, fake or not.

[impe]

53. 2 Schools of Thought on that...

One researcher claimed it was carbon dated to the time of Christ and in fact was real. You've chosen to believe
the only side's argument that it's a "fake". To each their own. Also, an entire Church's legitimacy rode on finding it
forged. Did you really think it would be found to be real?

[TankLV]

44. I think all of this is just fascinating.

I like to watch all kinds of programs like this - Mayan & Eqyptian stuff, too.

Better than watching the whore media and their slanted reporting as opposed to real real news.

[lil-petunia]

55. Hey lookie! we found a cave

3000 yrs old. oh, wow, pottery shards, it HAS to be John, just has to be.

It all makes sense. Cave, pots, bingo!

No way could it be a storage facility. An arms depot, a home, a trading place, a secret, anti-jewish meeting center? Not when the person who has the most to gain is the one coming up with the "discovery"!