Bethesda

VIEW:69 DATA:01-04-2020
house of pity or mercy
Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary


BETHESDA.—A reservoir at Jerusalem, remarkable (according to a gloss inserted in the text in some authoritative MSS) for a periodic disturbance of the water which was supposed to give it healing properties. Here were five porches. It was ‘by the sheep-gate.’ An impotent man, one of the many who waited for the troubling of the water, was here healed by Christ (Joh_5:2). The only body of water at Jerusalem that presents any analogous phenomenon is the intermittent spring known as the Virgin’s Fountain, in the Kidron valley, but it is not near the Sheep-gate. There is little that can be said in favour of any other of the numerous identifications that have been proposed for this pool.
R. A. S. Macalister.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909


("house of mercy".) A water reservoir, or swimming pool (as Joh_5:2, kolumbeethra, means), with five porches, or colonnades, close to the sheep gate (Neh_3:1) in Jerusalem. The porches accommodated those waiting for the troubling of the waters. Joh_5:4, as to the angel troubling the water, is omitted in the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts, but is found in the Alexandrinus, and Joh_5:7 favors it. The angels, in a way unknown to us, doubtless act as God's ministers in the world of nature. Many curative agencies are directed by them (Psa_104:4). God maketh His angelic messengers the directing powers, acting by the winds and flaming lightning.
The angelic actings, limited and fitful, attested at that time that God was visiting His people, throwing into the brighter prominence at the same time the actings of the divine Son (compare Hebrew 1), who healed not merely one exceptionally but all who came to Him, whatever might be their disease, and instantaneously. Now Birket Israil, within the walls, close by Stephen's gate, under the N.E. wall of the Haram area. Eusebius, in the 3rd century, describes it as consisting of two pools and named Bezatha, answering to the N.E. suburb Bezetha in the gospel times. Robinson suggested that "the pool of the Virgin" may answer to "the pool of Bethesda," "the king's pool" in Nehemiah. Ganneau identifies with the church of Anne, mother of Mary, Beit Hanna, really actually Bethesda, "house of grace."
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.


Bethes'da. (house of mercy, or the flowing water). The Hebrew name of a reservoir or tank, with five "porches," close upon the sheep-gate or "market" in Jerusalem. Joh_5:2. The largest reservoir ? Birket Israil ? 360 feet long, 120 feet wide and 80 feet deep, within the walls of the city, close by St. Stephen's Gate, and under the northeast wall of the Haram area, is generally considered to be the modern representative of Bethesda.
Robinson, however, suggests that the ancient Bethesda is identical with what is now called the Pool of the Virgin, an intermittent pool, south of Birket Israil and north of the pool of Siloam.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863


This word signifies the house of mercy, and was the name of a pool, or public bath, at Jerusalem, which had five porticos, piazzas, or covered walks around it. This bath was called Bethesda, because, as some observe, the erecting of baths was an act of great kindness to the common people, whose infirmities in hot countries required frequent bathing; but the generality of expositors think it had this name rather from the great goodness of God manifested to his people, in bestowing healing virtues upon its waters. The account of the evangelist is, “Now there was at Jerusalem, by the sheep market, a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue, Bethesda, having five porches. In these lay a multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water; for an angel went down at a certain season into the pool: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had,” Joh_5:2-4. The genuineness of the fourth verse has been disputed, because it is wanting in some ancient MSS, and is written in the margin of another as a scholion; but even were the spuriousness of this verse allowed, for which, however, the evidence is by no means satisfactory, the supernatural character of the account, as it is indicated by the other parts of the narrative, remains unaffected. The agitation of the water: its suddenly healing virtue as to all diseases; and the limitation to the first that should go in, are all miraculous circumstances. Commentators have however resorted to various hypotheses to account for the whole without divine agency. Dr. Hammond says, “The sacrifices were exceedingly numerous at the passover, κατακαιρον, (once a year, Chrysostom,) when the pool being warm from the immediate washing of the blood and entrails, and thus adapted to the cure of the blind, the withered, the lame, and perhaps the paralytic, was yet farther troubled, and the congelations and grosser parts stirred up by an officer or messenger, αγγελος, to give it the full effect.” To this hypothesis Whitby acutely replies,
1. How could this natural virtue be adapted to, and cure, all kinds of diseases?
2. How could the virtue only extend to the cure of one man, several probably entering at the same instant?
3. How unlikely is it, if natural, to take place only at one certain time, at the passover? for there was a multitude of sacrifices slain at other of the feasts.
4. Lastly, and decisively, Lightfoot shows that there was a laver in the temple for washing the entrails; therefore they were not washed in this pool at all.
Others, however, suppose that the blood of the victims was conveyed from the temple to this pool by pipes; and Kuinoel thinks that it cannot be denied that the blood of animals recently slaughtered may impart a medicinal property to water; and he refers to Richter's “Dissertat, de Balneo Animali,” and Michaelis in loc. But he admits that it cannot be proved whether the pool was situated out of the city at the sheep gate, or in the city, and in the vicinity of the temple; nor that the blood of the victims was ever conveyed thither by canals. Kuinoel justly observes, that though in Josephus no mention is made of the baths here described, yet this silence ought not to induce us to question the truth of this transaction; since the historian omits to record many other circumstances which cannot be doubted; as, for instance, the census of Augustus, and the murder of the infants. This critic also supposes that St. John only acts the part of an historian, and gives the account as it was current among the Jews, without vouching for its truth, or interposing his own judgment. Mede follows in the track of absurdly attempting to account for the phenomenon on natural principles:—”I think the water of this pool acquired a medicinal property from the mud at its bottom, which was heavy with metallic salts,—sulphur perhaps, or alum, or nitre. Now this would, from the water being perturbed from the bottom by some natural cause, perhaps subterranean heat, or storms, rise upward and be mingled with it, and so impart a sanative property to those who bathed in it before the metallic particles had subsided to the bottom. That it should have done so, κατα καιρον, is not strange, since Bartholin has, by many examples shown, that it is usual with many medicinal baths, to exert a singular force and sanative power at stated times, and at periodical, but uncertain, intervals.” Doddridge combines the common hypothesis with that of Mede; namely, that the water had at all times more or less of a medicinal property; but at some period, not far distant from that in which the transaction here recorded took place, it was endued with a miraculous power; an extraordinary commotion being probably observed in the water, and Providence so ordering it, that the next person who accidentally bathed here, being under some great disorder, found an immediate and unexpected cure: the like phenomenon in some other desperate case, was probably observed on a second commotion: and these commotions and cures might happen periodically.
All those hypotheses which exclude miracle in this case are very unsatisfactory, nor is there any reason whatever to resort to them; for, when rightly viewed, there appears a mercy and a wisdom in this miracle which must strike every one who attentively considers the account, unless he be a determined unbeliever in miraculous interposition. For,
1. The miracle occurred κατα καιρον, from time to time, that is, occasionally, perhaps frequently.
2. Though but one at a time was healed, yet, as this might often occur, a singularly gracious provision was made for the relief of the sick inhabitants of Jerusalem in desperate cases.
3. The angel probably acted invisibly, but the commotion in the waters was so strong and peculiar as to mark a supernatural agent.
4. There is great probability in what Doddridge, following Tertullian, supposes, that the waters obtained their healing property not long before the ministry of Christ, and lost it after his rejection and crucifixion by the Jews. In this case a connection was established between the healing virtue of the pool and the presence of Christ on earth, indicating HIM to be the source of this benefit, and the true agent in conferring it; and thus it became, afterward at least, a confirmation of his mission.
5. The whole might also be emblematical, “intended,” says Macknight, “to show that Ezekiel's vision of waters issuing out of the sanctuary was about to be fulfilled, of which waters it is said, They shall be healed, and every thing shall live where the river cometh.” It cannot be objected that this was not an age of miracles; and if miracles be allowed, we see in this particular supernatural visitation obvious reasons of fitness, as well as a divine compassion. If however the ends to be accomplished by so public and notable a miraculous interposition were less obvious, still we must admit the fact, or either force absurd interpretations upon the text, or make the evangelist carelessly give his sanction to an instance of vulgar credulity and superstition.
Maundrell and Chateaubriand both describe a bason or reservoir, near St. Stephen's gate, and bounding the temple on the north, as the identical pool of Bethesda; which, if it really be what it is represented to be, is all that now remains of the primitive architecture of the Jews at Jerusalem. The latter says, “It is a reservoir, a hundred and fifty feet long and forty wide. The sides are walled, and these walls are composed of a bed of large stones joined together by iron cramps; a wall of mixed materials runs up on these large stones; a layer of flints is stuck upon the surface of this wall; and a coating is laid over these flints. The four beds are perpendicular with the bottom, and not horizontal: the coating was on the side next to the water; and the large stones rested, as they still do, against the ground. This pool is now dry, and half filled up. Here grow some pomegranate trees, and a species of wild tamarind of a bluish colons: the western angle is quite full of nopals. Or the west side may also be seen two arches, which probably led to an aqueduct that carried the water into the interior of the temple.”
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.


bē̇-thez?da (Βηθεσδά, Bēthesdá; Textus Receptus of the New Testament, Joh_5:2 (probably בּית חסדּא, bēth ḥiṣdā), ?house of mercy?); other forms occur as Bēthzathá and Bēthsaidá):
1. The Conditions of the Narrative: Joh_5:2
The only data we have is the statement in Joh_5:2-4 : ?Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porches. In these lay a multitude of them that were sick, blind, halt, withered.? Many ancient authorities add (as in the Revised Version, margin) ?waiting for the moving of the water: for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool, and troubled the water,? etc.
The name does not help as to the site, no such name occurs elsewhere in Jerusalem; the mention of the sheep gate is of little assistance because the word ?gate? is supplied, and even were it there, its site is uncertain. Sheep ?pool? or ?place? is at least as probable; the tradition about the ?troubling of the water? (which may be true even if the angelic visitant may be of the nature of folk-lore) can receive no rational explanation except by the well-known phenomenon, by no means uncommon in Syria and always considered the work of a supernatural being, of an intermittent spring. The arrangement of the five porches is similar to that demonstrated by Dr. F. Bliss as having existed in Roman times as the Pool of Siloam; the story implies that the incident occurred outside the city walls, as to carry a bed on the Sabbath would not have been forbidden by Jewish traditional law.
2. The Traditional Site
Tradition has varied concerning the site. In the 4th century, and probably down to the Crusades, a pool was pointed out as the true site, a little to the Northwest of the present Stephen's Gate; it was part of a twin pool and over it were erected at two successive periods two Christian churches. Later on this site was entirely lost and from the 13th century the great Birket Israel, just North of the Temple area, was pointed out as the site.
Within the last quarter of a century, however, the older traditional site, now close to the Church of Anne, has been rediscovered, excavated and popularly accepted. This pool is a rock-cut, rain-filled cistern, 55 ft. long X 12 ft. broad, and is approached by a steep and winding flight of steps. The floor of the rediscovered early Christian church roofs over the pool, being supported upon five arches in commemoration of the five porches. At the western end of the church, where probably the font was situated, there was a fresco, now much defaced and fast fading, representing the angel troubling the waters.
3. A More Probable Site
Although public opinion supports this site, there is much to be said for the proposal, promulgated by Robinson and supported by Conder and other good authorities, that the pool was at the ?Virgin's Fount? (see GIHON), which is today an intermittent spring whose ?troubled? waters are still visited by Jews for purposes of cure. As the only source of ?living water? near Jerusalem, it is a likely spot for there to have been a ?sheep pool? or ?sheep place? for the vast flocks of sheep coming to Jerusalem in connection with the temple ritual. See Biblical World, XXV, 80ff.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.



Fig. 93?Pool of Bethesda
Bethe?sda (house or place of mercy), a pool at the Sheep-gate of Jerusalem, built round with porches for the accommodation of the sick who sought benefit from the healing virtues of the water, and upon one of whom Christ performed the healing miracle recorded by St. John (Joh_5:2-9). That which is now, and has long been pointed out as the Pool of Bethesda, is a dry basin or reservoir outside the northern wall of the enclosure around the Temple Mount, of which wall its southern side may be said to form a part. The east end of it is close to the present gate of St. Stephen. The pool measures 360 feet in length, 130 feet in breadth, and 75 in depth from the bottom, besides the rubbish which has been accumulated in it for ages. Dr. Robinson is of opinion that this excavation is not entitled to the designation it bears; but his arguments have been so forcibly met by more recent and not less useful inquirers, that until some better alternative is offered, it will be well to acquiesce in the local conclusion.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.


Bethesda
(Βηθεσδά, for Chald. בֵּית אֶשְׁדָּא, house of the mercy, q. d. charity- hospital; or, according to others, for Chald. בֵּית אֶשְׁדָּאּ, place of the flowing, sc. of water), the name of a reservoir or tank (κολυμβήθρα, i.e. swimming-pool), with five “porches” (στοάς), close upon the sheep-gate or “market” (ἐπὶ τῇ προβατικῇ — it will be observed that the word “market” is supplied) in Jerusalem (Joh_5:2). The porches — i.e. cloisters or colonnades — were extensive enough to accommodate a large number of sick and infirm people, whose custom it was to wait there for the “troubling of the water.” One of these invalids is recorded to have been cured by Christ in the above passage, where also we are told that an angel went down at a certain season into the pool and troubled the water, and then whoever first stepped in' was made whole. There seems to have been no special medicinal virtue in the water itself, and only he who first stepped in after the troubling was healed. It may be remarked that the evangelist, in giving the account of the descent of the angel into the pool and the effects following, does not seem to do any more than state the popular legend as he found it, without vouching for its truth, except so far as it explained the invalid's presence there.
Eusebius and Jerome — though unfortunately they give no clew to the situation of Bethesda — describe it in the Onomasticon (s.v. Βηζαθά, Bethesda) as existing in their time as two pools, the one supplied by the periodical rains, while the water of the other was of a reddish color, due, as the tradition then ran, to the fact that the flesh of the sacrifices was anciently washed there before offering, on which account the pool was also called “the Sheep-pool” (Pecualis, Προβατική). See, however, the comments of Lightfoot on this view, in his Exercit. on St. John , 5, 2. Eusebius's statement is partly confirmed by the Bordeaux Pilgrim (A.D. 333), who mentions in his Itinerary “twin fish-pools, having five porches, which are called Bethsaida” (quoted in Barclay, p. 299). The large reservoir called by the Mohammedans Birket Israil, within the walls of the city, close by the St. Stephen's gate, and under the north-east wall of the Haram area is generally considered to be the modern representative of Bethesda. This tradition reaches back certainly to the time of Saewulf, A.D. 1102, who mentions it under the name of Bethsaida (Early Trav. p. 41). It is also named in the Citez de Jherusalem, A.D. 1187 (sect. 7), and in more modern times by Maundrell and all the late travelers. The pool measures 360 feet in length, 130 feet in breadth, and 75 in depth to the bottom, besides the rubbish which has accumulated in it for ages. Although it has been dry for above two centuries, it was once evidently used as a reservoir, for the sides internally have been cased over with small stones, and these again covered with plaster; but the workmanship of these additions is coarse, and bears no special marks of antiquity. The west end is built up like the rest, except at the south-west corner, where two lofty arched vaults extended westward, side by side, under the houses that now cover this part. Dr. Robinson was able to trace the continuation of the work in this direction under one of these vaults for 100 feet, and it seemed to extend much farther. This gives the whole a length of 160 feet, equal to one half of the whole extent of the sacred enclosure under which it lies. Mr. Wolcott, writing since, says, “The southern vault extends 130 feet, and the other apparently the same. At the extremity of the former was an opening for drawing up water. The vaults are stuccoed” (Bibliotheca Sacra, 1843, p. 33). It would seem as if the deep reservoir formerly extended farther westward in this part, and that these vaults were built up in and over it in order to support the structures above. Dr. Robinson considers it probable that this excavation was anciently carried quite through the ridge of Bezetha, along, the northern side of Antonia to its N.W. corner, thus forming the deep trench which separated the fortress from the adjacent hill (Bib. Researches, 1, 433, 434). The little that can be said on the subject, however, goes nearly as much to confirm as to invalidate the traditionary identification.
(1) On the one hand, the most probable position of the sheep-gate is at the east part of the city. SEE SHEEP-GATE. On the other hand, the Birket Israil exhibits none of the marks which appear to have distinguished the water of Bethesda in the records of the Evangelist and of Eusebius; it certainly is neither pentagonal nor double.
(2) The construction of the Birkch is such as to show that it was originally a water-reservoir, and not the moat of a fortress. SEE JERUSALEM.
(3) There is certainly a remarkable coincidence between the name as given by Eusebius, Bezatha, and that of the north-east suburb of the city at the time of the Gospel history-Bezetha (q.v.).
(4) There is the difficulty that if the Birket Israil be not Bethesda, which of the ancient “pools” does it represent? On the whole, however, the most probable identification of the ancient Bethesda is that of Dr. Robinson (i. 508), who suggests the “fountain of the Virgin;” in the valley of the Kedron, a short distance above the Pool of Siloam. In favor of this are its situation, supposing the sheep-gate to be at the south-east of the city, as Lightfoot, Robinson, and others suppose, and the strange intermittent “troubling of the water” caused by the periodical ebbing and flowing of the supply. Against it are the confined size of the pool, and the difficulty of finding room for the five stoae. (See Barclay's detailed account, City of the Great King, p. 516-524, and 325, 6.) SEE JERUSALEM.
For rabbinical allusions to this subject, see Lightfoot, in loc. Joh.; for a discussion of the medical qualities of the water, see Bartholin, De paralytic. N.T. p. 398; Mead, Med. Sacr. c. 8; Witsius, Miscell. 2, 249 sq.; D'Outrein, in the Biblioth. Brem. 1, 597 sq.; Rus, Harmon. Evang. 1, 680; Eschenbach, Scripta Med. Bibl. p. 60 sq.; Stiebriz, An piscina Beths. calidis aquis numerari queat (Hal. 1739); Reis, Josephi silentium ev. historiae non noxium (Altdorf. 1730), p. 17 sq.; Richter, De balneo animali (in his Dissert. Med. Gott. 1775, p. 107); Schulze, in the Berlin. verm. Abhandl. ii. 146 sq.; Jungmarker, Bethesda haud balneum animale (Gryph. 1766); on the miracle, treatises are by Harenberg (in the Bibl. Brem. I, 6, p. 82 sq.), Olearius (Lips. 1706), Ziebich (Gerl. 1768), Schelgvig (Gedan. 1681, 1701); also general treatises, De piscina Bethesda, by Arnold (Jen. 1661), Frischmuth (Jen. 1661), Hottinger (Tigur. 1705), Sommelius (Lund. 1767), Wendeler (Viteb. 1676). The place has been described more or less fully by nearly every traveler in Jerusalem. (See especially De Saulcy, Dead Sea, 2, 244 sq.)



CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.





Norway

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores

Comments   2

BUSCADAVERDADE

Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!


Saiba Mais

  • Image Nutrição
    Vegetarianismo e a Vitamina B12
  • Image Receita
    Como preparar a Proteína Vegetal Texturizada
  • Image Arqueologia
    Livro de Enoque é um livro profético?
  • Image Profecia
    O que ocorrerá no Armagedom?

Tags