Click here (biblewalks.com) to view some vivid pictures of the archaeological remains at Khirbet et-Tell (lit. 'The ruin of the mound'), which the excavators argue is Biblical Bethsaida, the fishing village referenced in the Gospels...
Do you think that this site would be receiving as much scholarly attention were it not potentially associated with Jesus? Why/why not?
5 comments:
Anonymous
said...
This is very interesting. Of course it is important just in regular history as well as biblical history. so everyone is interested in where is place is located.
I think its religious association makes the site more appealing to a wider audience, as its religious significance serves as another reason to be interested in it. Not only would the site be fascinating to archeologists, historians, etc, but also to religious scholars. Therefor, I think it is likely receiving more attention due to the association with Jesus.
I agree with Lauren's comment. It is still a site of remnants of ancient civilization, so would definitely get scholarly attention. A wider audience period would be attracted as well as a wider scholarly audience, the site being associated with Jesus, because so much of the world is religiously interested in anything having to do with such an important and influential figure as Jesus.
I agree with the statements above, if the site didn't have the association it does with Jesus then there wouldn't be as fascinating as it is to religious scholars and historians. Without this association, it would just be another piece of land to dig up to see what cool artifacts they could find.
The site likely would not be receiving as much scholarly attention were it not potentially linked to Jesus. Throughout the Middle East, there are many ruins and structures from ancient times. Not all of them receive this much attention - particularly such detailed attention - from typical anthropological scholars. In many cases, I feel like sites associated with Jesus are pored over and read into because of their potential association with Biblical tradition.
5 comments:
This is very interesting. Of course it is important just in regular history as well as biblical history. so everyone is interested in where is place is located.
Lisa
I think its religious association makes the site more appealing to a wider audience, as its religious significance serves as another reason to be interested in it. Not only would the site be fascinating to archeologists, historians, etc, but also to religious scholars. Therefor, I think it is likely receiving more attention due to the association with Jesus.
Lauren
I agree with Lauren's comment. It is still a site of remnants of ancient civilization, so would definitely get scholarly attention. A wider audience period would be attracted as well as a wider scholarly audience, the site being associated with Jesus, because so much of the world is religiously interested in anything having to do with such an important and influential figure as Jesus.
Sydney
I agree with the statements above, if the site didn't have the association it does with Jesus then there wouldn't be as fascinating as it is to religious scholars and historians. Without this association, it would just be another piece of land to dig up to see what cool artifacts they could find.
Saryn
The site likely would not be receiving as much scholarly attention were it not potentially linked to Jesus. Throughout the Middle East, there are many ruins and structures from ancient times. Not all of them receive this much attention - particularly such detailed attention - from typical anthropological scholars. In many cases, I feel like sites associated with Jesus are pored over and read into because of their potential association with Biblical tradition.
Sophie
Post a Comment