Servant of God, persuer of the truth, Patriot, dog breeder. WWG1WGA (Please don't follow me if you are looking for a romantic hookup)
Archaeology Just Confirmed John 5 — And Critics Are Running Out of Excuses
For decades, skeptics claimed the Gospel of John was too theological, too symbolic, too “late” to be historically reliable.
Then archaeology spoke.
Excavations in Jerusalem uncovered the Pool of Bethesda, revealing five porticoes exactly as described in John 5 — the very detail scholars once mocked as fictional.
Five.
Not four.
Not symbolic.
Five.
This matters more than people realize.
John 5 describes Jesus healing a paralyzed man at a pool “having five covered colonnades.” Critics long argued this was a literary invention because no such structure was known in Jerusalem. The assumption was simple: the Bible exaggerated.
But archaeology overturned the accusation.
Beneath later Roman layers, archaeologists uncovered a dual-pool complex divided by a central wall, creating five surrounding porticoes — precisely matching the biblical account. The Gospel wasn’t guessing. It was reporting.
And that’s the uncomfortable truth.
The Bible keeps being validated not by sermons, but by stones, soil, and ruins. Each discovery narrows the space for dismissing Scripture as myth while exposing how often modern skepticism is rooted more in ideology than evidence.
This isn’t about proving miracles with shovels.
It’s about credibility.
If John was accurate about architectural details critics swore were invented, then the burden of proof shifts — not onto believers, but onto those who claimed the text couldn’t be trusted.
And here’s the part that stings the loudest:
The same Gospel scholars dismissed as symbolic fiction accurately recorded a real place, real structure, and real setting for a real healing.
You don’t have to believe the miracle to admit this:
The Bible knew Jerusalem better than its critics.
Every shovel in the ground keeps asking the same question:
If Scripture keeps getting the history right…
how long before people reconsider the message?
