Archaeologists Unveil Ancient Church Site

MEGIDDO PRISON, Israel - Israeli prisoner Ramil Razilo was removing rubble from the planned site of a new prison ward when his shovel uncovered the edge of an elaborate mosaic, unveiling what Israeli archaeologists said Sunday may be the Holy Land's oldest church.

The discovery of the church in the northern Israeli town of Megiddo, near the biblical Armageddon, was hailed by experts as an important discovery that could reveal details about the development of the early church in the region. Archaeologists said the church dated from the third century, decades before Constantine legalized Christianity across the Byzantine Empire.

"What's clear today is that it's the oldest archaeological remains of a church in Israel, maybe even in the entire region. Whether in the entire world, it's still too early to say," said Yotam Tepper, the excavation's head archaeologist.

Israeli officials were giddy about the discovery, with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon calling the church "an amazing story."

Vatican officials also hailed the find.

"A discovery of this kind will make Israel more interesting to all Christians, for the church all over the world," said Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the Vatican envoy to Jerusalem. "If it's true that the church and the beautiful mosaics are from the third century, it would be one of the most ancient churches in the Middle East."

Razilo, who is serving a two-year sentence for traffic violations, was one of about 50 prisoners brought into the high-security Megiddo Prison to help excavate the area before the construction of new wards for 1,200 Palestinian prisoners.

Razilo was shocked to uncover the edge of the mosaic. The inmates worked for months to uncover all the parts of the mosaic — the floor of the church, he said.

"We continued to look and slowly we found this whole beautiful thing," said Razilo, who used a sponge and a bucket of water to clean dirt off the uncovered mosaics Sunday.

Two mosaics inside the church — one covered with fish, an ancient Christian symbol that predates the cross — tell the story of a Roman officer and a woman named Aketous who donated money to build the church in the memory "of the god, Jesus Christ."

Pottery remnants from the third century, the style of Greek writing used in the inscriptions, ancient geometric patterns in the mosaics and the depiction of fish rather than the cross indicate that the church was no longer used by the fourth century, Tepper said.

The church's location, not far from the spot where the New Testament says the final battle between good and evil will take place, also made sense because a bishop was active in the area at the time, said Tepper, who works with the Israel Antiquities Authority.

The inscription, which specifies that Aketous donated a table to the church, indicates the house of worship predated the Byzantine era, when Christians began using altars in place of tables in their rituals, Tepper said. Remnants of a table were uncovered between the two mosaics.

The building — most of which was destroyed — also was not built in the Basilica style that was standard under the Byzantines, he added.

Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar and professor at the Holy Land University, said the second and third centuries were transitional periods where people sought to define their religious beliefs and modes of worship. Iconography and inscriptions found in Nazareth and Caperneum — places where Jesus lived — show that people went there to worship, although most did so secretly.

"This was a time of persecution and in this way it is quite surprising that there would be such a blatant expression of Christ in a mosaic, but it may be the very reason why the church was destroyed," Pfann said.

The dig will continue as archaeologists try to uncover the rest of the building and its surroundings, including what they believe could be a baptismal site, Tepper said.

Joe Zias, an anthropologist and former curator with the antiquities authority, questioned the dating of the find, saying there is no evidence of churches before the fourth century. The building may have been in use earlier, but most likely not for Christian religious purposes, he said.

"They're going to be hard, hard-pressed to prove it ... because the evidence argues otherwise," Zias said.

_______________________________________


A few things come to mind:
1) The fish symbol can't predate the cross. The cross upon which Jesus died is the reason and symbol of why we have Christians today. The fish is the symbol Christians used to identify themselves to other Christians after the church started. They were persecuted and had to have a way to determine friend or foe without giving themselves away.

The only way the fish would predate, is if they are saying that Christians didn't use the cross as a symbol until later. If this is the intended meaning, the article should say so for historical accuracy. However, the cross has also been a symbol of Christians from the time of the early church's beginnings. Either way, the statement would be inaccurate.

2) The writers of the story are pc cowards because they said "god, Jesus Christ" instead of "God, Jesus Christ". That capital G would get them in deep doo-doo and they know it, so they take the easy way out.

3) It should not be so surprising that Christians were blatantly willing to worship in a time of persecutions. While protecting personal security, they were in no way ashamed of their corporate worship, or of bearing witness for Christ when the opportunity presented itself. This is why during the greatest times of martyrdom, the church still flourished. Christians had guts to get involved because they understood that they would never suffer more for their Savior, than He had suffered for them out of love.

4) Zias' comment is arrogant, ignorant, and so biased it is really very sad. His automatic response is to disregard any chance of Christianity laying claim to the find, because he doesn't want it to be true.

First, we wouldn't have a fourth centure had it not been for Christ. Lest we forget, we count time DOWN up to the point of the Christ's birth, and only started counting up after His birth. In fact, without his birth, there would be no BC, AD, or the more politcally correct BCE or CE or any other letters to distinguish by. He so impacted the world that they started time over. Isn't it just like God to put things in proper perspective? Only after God came to earth did mankind to look at lives as a progression...so much so that they dated everything with Christ as the reference point.

Second, the church has existed from the time of about 33 A.D. This isn't hard to prove, he just has to look at ALL the documents of the time....he can't leave out the ones that talked about Jesus. How frustrating it must be for him to be an atheist and unable to intelligently argue points, because he has to disregard evidence without study or chance proving himself wrong. O the heights of human pride. We just refuse to be wrong.

2 Tim.4:3 -"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the the truth and turn aside to myths." Yep, sounds like our day.

Even more our day, check this one out: 2 Tim.3:1-5 -" But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, tracherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God--having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have notyhing to do with them." Yes, this sounds like our day and time.

Notice Paul's warning to Timothy..."have nothing to do with them". So how much attention should we pay to the "learned and educated" speeches of Zias?

Comments or thoughts???

Athosxc