PDA

View Full Version : Second Temple village uncovered


grinner
08-28-2004, 08:49 AM
Second Temple village uncovered
Etgar Lefkovits, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 25, 2004

Israeli archeologists have uncovered a 5,000-year-old Canaanite city and a 2,000-year-old Jewish village from the Second Temple period alongside each other in the Modi'in area.

The adjacent ancient sites, which were known to exist but previously lay untouched, lie on a barren, wind-whipped hilltop spanning 120 dunams near the present-day Israeli town of Shoham.

The area of the sites was to be converted into an industrial zone, but the finds – which include the remnants of ancient streets in each city, being excavated now by archeologists from the Antiquities Authority – will be exhibited in an archeological park.

The rural Jewish town uncovered at the site existed from about 100 BCE to 135 CE, until the Bar Kochba revolt, said archeologist Dr. David Amit. Several hundred people are estimated to have lived there, perhaps the extended members of five to eight families. Excavations at the ancient village have uncovered a 2,000-year-old street, Jewish coins from the time of the rebellion, and wine presses, as well as a mikve (Jewish spiritual bath). The mikve, which is still visible, was turned into a regular water well by pagans who lived at the 50-dunam village for several generations after the Jews vacated the area.

Adjacent to the Jewish village lies a 5,000-year-old Canaanite city from the Early Bronze Age, dating to approximately 3,000 BCE. The 70-80 dunam city, which was divided into a smaller upper and a larger lower level and was surrounded by a wall and watch towers, existed for up to 400 years, said Tel Aviv University archeologist Sarit Paz, who is heading the excavations at the site.

The well-planned city, which dates back to the time between Noah and Abraham, is thought to have been home to several hundred people. The builders of the nearby Jewish village used some of the original stones from the Canaanite city in building their own town, Paz said.

The impressive remnants of a 5,000-year-old street, an assortment of pottery and cutting vessels, flint Canaanite blades, stone beads, and a variety of colored juglets, have been uncovered by Paz and her team.

The Antiquities Authority says that the quality and extent of the finds uncovered during the three-month excavation at both sites is "unprecedented."link (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer&cid=1093402928581)

This article made me think about something. The calender that we use, the Gregorian, uses the Christian annotation BC and AD. BC for Before Christ and AD - Anno Domini means 'In the year of Our Lord'. Now there are people pushing for BCE, Before Common Era and CE, Common Era, to be used instead. Now, is this a PC issue, or is it something else. There are other calenders in use than just the Gregorian... but the dominant one is the Gregorian. Any thoughts? This (http://www.radix.net/~dglenn/defs/ce.html) is an interesting site that sort of explains it... but... I don't know. I am used to using AD and BC...

grinner
08-28-2004, 08:52 AM
Then there is this (http://vcourseware.calstatela.edu/VirtualDating/files/RC_3.html) website that brings into 1950 as the year 0 for BP/P. gets a bit complicated.

grinner
08-28-2004, 09:01 AM
Then there is the whole +/- use for dating... this year is +2004 and the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War -431. This is getting confusing.

Scarran Raptor
08-28-2004, 10:02 AM
not to mention the use of lunar calendars to further complicate things

Third EYe
08-28-2004, 12:32 PM
and pez

Darth Buddha
08-28-2004, 12:56 PM
Damn pez, anyway.

Especially Donnie Osmond Pez...

who45
08-28-2004, 04:26 PM
I think it should stay the same, BC and AD that's what has been used all these many years. Makes no sense to me to change it now, but that is just my opinion. I have other thoughts on this issue, but it gets more into religion and I do not want to start anything so...I will leave it like it is.

Clarsax
08-28-2004, 06:32 PM
It's been the same for centuries. Why change now? It works just fine the way it is.

TheBladeRoden
08-28-2004, 08:14 PM
Because it's one of the most outragous acts of Christian imperialism.





International Committee Against
Christian Calendar Imperialism in U.N.O. (ICACCI)


The facts: The United Nations Organization that supposedly speaks and rules impartially for all nations of the Earth, is still using the Christian calendar which is viewed as being disrespectful for all other religions of the world.

There are only 1 billion Christians in the 6 billion people world population.

This clearly indicates that Christians are a minority. So how can this minority’s calendar be imposed on the UN body which supposedly represents the other 5 billion people?

Why should Muslim or Buddhist countries have to participate in a world’s organization that denies their dignity by using another religion’s calendar?

Isn’t the use of this Christian calendar by the UN evidence that this organization is a puppet whose strings are pulled by the western Christian powers?

The solution: The adoption by the UN of a non-religious calendar based on a non-religious historical event. For instance, it can be a calendar in which year 0 would either be the date the UN was founded or the date marked by the explosion of the atomic bomb over Hiroshima. If the latter would be accepted, this means that 2001 (august 6th) would, in fact, be the year 56 aH (after Hiroshima).

The proposed action: To put enough pressure on your national government so that they, in turn, force the UN to be respectful of non-Christian countries and people by adopting a non-religious official calendar.

How can your own government betray your Muslim faith by accepting to ratify treaties at the UN using the Christian calendar?

Isn’t the UN clearly saying that the Christian faith has superiority over the Muslim faith? If not, why impose on Muslim governments the ratification of official UN documents using the Christian calendar?

Act right now! We must act immediately and put pressure on the UN to change this. The first step is to organize a founding meeting of our committee. At the same time, you can immediately start amongst your militants and population to petition people, organize press campaigns and meet your local government officials to request for this fundamental and basic international respect for your faith. The UN should not impose a Christian calendar onto others! How would Christians react if, all of a sudden, the UN used a Muslim calendar? After so many years of Christian insults to the Muslim through the UN’s approval of a Christian calendar, the UN should render justice by asking for at least 20 years of Muslim calendar… But forgiveness may make us accept apologies from the UN and the use, from today on, of a non-Christian neutral calendar. Enough insults!


Help us organize the founding meeting: Be part of the historical founders of our organization by organizing the first meeting of the ICACCI. We need help and we need to synchronize our efforts between non-Christian religious and political leaders of the world. For the very respect of your faith and to the memory of the victims of the Christian colonization.
The first help we need is a site where representatives from all over the world can have this first meeting to discuss strategies, elect the first representatives for our organization, and organize an international office. If your country can provide these facilities and help, your name will stay in History forever as a fighter for the respect of your faith.

RAËL
Founder of the ICACCI

RAËL
C/O IRM
CP 225
CH 1211 GENEVA
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 343 06 56
E-mail: info@icacci.org

grinner
08-28-2004, 09:19 PM
:rolleyes: whatever...

Nicola
08-28-2004, 10:08 PM
Just because Western Culture imposes their calendar on the rest of the world does not mean that it is the one that everyone uses, or the one that everyone is interested in using.

I had the interesting experience once of using a calendar that included the Buddhist, Muslim and Christian ways of dividing up the year. Believe me.... not only does a large percentage of the worlds population not use the Christian calendar... but they are not interested in the slightest in converting.

To assume that the Christian Calendar is the best or even the most popular option is ethnocentric.

grinner
08-28-2004, 10:21 PM
uh, okay... I was remarking on the AD/BC to CE/BCE issue. I don't care about the other calenders at all. In the US and Canada... and pretty much all of Europe, we use the Gregorian Calender. I was just making an observation of why it would need to change form BC/AD to BCE/CE.

Then I remarked about how some were writing it... The GREGORIAN calender with +/- in front of the date. That is what THIS discussion is about. Not if the Gregorian Calender is better than any other... just the fact that there are some groups that are looking to change the terminology of the Gregorian Calender.

Mike0812
08-29-2004, 09:50 AM
Because it's one of the most outragous acts of Christian imperialism.

It's too bad the article or the "organization" doesn't get its facts straight. There are least close to 2 billion Christians (if not more) and it is THE largest religion in the world. Figures, this is the same enlightned gentleman from CLONAID which is in turn associated with the Raelian movement. Interesting...but hey, who cares about facts of any kind when you're dealing with "Western or Christian Imperialism" :rolleyes:...

As for the topic itself, I like the AD-BC notations, it's what I'm used to and it sounds cool in Latin.

I didn't know we were "imposing" our calendar on others. As far as I know, people can choose whatever system they want, as do the Jews, Muslims, Chinese, etc. But, I suppose we should apologize for being economically, politically and culturally successful...:rolleyes:

LT Garrix
08-29-2004, 09:58 AM
I resist change. And the calendar got world exposure through European colonialism. While the start date is based on a Christian event, that BTW, didn't really happen at year 1, the months are mostly Roman with a few more added in to normalize the year. So, it's not entirely a Christian calendar.

As for the +/- thing, I like the sound of AD/BC, but it really doesn't matter for me.