Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ANE-2] Re: [biblical-studies] Much Temple Mount Ado About Nothing

Expand Messages
  • Dave Washburn
    Considering some things that have come to light in recent years, I would consider the reputation of the IAA somewhat less than stellar. The fact (if indeed it
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Considering some things that have come to light in recent years, I would
      consider the reputation of the IAA somewhat less than stellar. The fact
      (if indeed it is a fact) that they are doing nothing most likely means
      just that: they're doing nothing. I doubt it says much at all about the
      site.

      On Sat, September 1, 2007 10:58 am, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
      > On 8/31/07, Jim West wrote:
      >
      >> AFP reports today that
      >>
      >> Israeli officials cast doubt Friday over claims that remains of the
      >> second Jewish temple might have been found during work to lay pipes at
      >> the Al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem.
      >>
      >> "If that was the case, the antiquities authority, which has an observer
      >> on site, as well as police, also monitoring the work, would have stepped
      >> in," said archaeologist Dan Bahat, a former excavations official in
      >> Jerusalem.
      >>
      >> Bahat said he would visit the site, but accused nameless archaeologists
      >> with a nationalist agenda of "waging a politically inspired campaign,
      >> systematically for several years, to strengthen Israeli control over the
      >> esplanade".
      >>
      >> So perhaps earlier reports were much ado about nothing at all.
      >
      > In a Israeli newspaper a few months ago, one columnist described a call
      > to an expert a university about some question. The professor in response
      > quoted Dan Margalit (a reporter/columnist) as saying that there is a
      > difference between female and male professors. When asked to comment
      > on, say, Morocco, a woman would say, "I'm an expert in Algeria, and even
      > though it's nearby, I suggest you find someone else." A man would say,
      > "I'm really an expert in Afghanistan but I'd love to come and comment."
      >
      > So, don't you think it's odd that Bahat is willing to comment on the
      > finds without having come to look at the site first? His only basis of
      > evidence as to whether the finds are or are not part of the Second Temple
      > courtyard is the behavior of the Antiquities Authority. His accusation
      > against the Antiquities Authority is really worse than Barkay's. Dr.
      > Barkay and the other archaeologists only suggest that the Antiquities
      > Authority is doing nothing as a tractor digs up ancient finds at a
      > declared
      > antiquities site. Dr. Bahat suggests that the Antiquities Authority is
      > doing nothing because the finds are not related to Jewish history (from his
      > point of view) and therefore, it's ok to use a tractor to dig them up and
      > destroy them! Look again at the pictures, especially at the next to the last
      > picture:
      > http://www.echad.info/bait/new_ditchE28-08-07.htm
      >
      > For what it's worth, Bahat's own book on the history of Jerusalem
      > describes a wall only during Biblical times and not afterwards,
      > in the location described in the map. As for the Antiquities Authority,
      > listing all the times the Antiquities Authority has stood by and done
      > nothing, perjured itself in the Israeli Supreme Court to the effect that
      > antiquities were not being destroyed (only to later claim that indeed
      > archaeological crimes have been committed, or after earlier having
      > claimed that it has little information on how antiquities are being
      > handled at the site) would be far too long for a mailing list post, or
      > even a newspaper article. The Authority's (as well as the Police and
      > the Prosecution's) behavior in this matter has been to release little
      > and sometimes misleading information in order to avoid a public
      > uproar over the crimes being committed. The Israeli Supreme Court's
      > position has generally been to avoid interference even in light of
      > flagrant violations of the law. Dan Bahat's statement above is no more
      > than continuing this policy.
      >
      > Yitzhak Sapir
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      --
      Dave Washburn
      Why do it right when you can do it again?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.