Christians, what do you think about the 'find of the century' in Israel?

Question

http://ca.search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGkmaB8.xRLH0Ai3brFAx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE1ZmZuZTNmBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA01TWUNBQzFfNzY-/SIG=11oq8nvf6/EXP=1374512129/**http%3a//rense.com/general69/david.htm


I remember when people were claiming he never existed, that there
never was such a kingdom, that it was not big or strong...all those
things were said.

http://ca.search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGkmaB8.xRLH0Aj3brFAx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE1c3NyYWhoBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA01TWUNBQzFfNzY-/SIG=14b68agb4/EXP=1374512129/**http%3a//artdaily.com/news/63857/Israel-Antiquities-Authority--King-David-s-Palace-was-uncovered-in-the-Judean-Shephelah-


This should help Christians with their apologetics of the OT,
with their knowing the bible is very true and accurate.

(and there are other finds which could be posted also)

PLEASE...note...this is not 'What do you think...?' but 'Christians, what do you think..."
so negative comments are abusive, request they are left off if you can do that.

..

..

Answer 1

Yes, a good link. It shows the truth of 2 Samuel 5:4 - 5: "David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned for forty years. In Hebron he reigned over Judah for seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah for thirty-three years."



This discovery shows the first seat of power where David ruled from.

Joshua 15 details the towns of the Shephelah, south of Jerusalem.



I'm not surprised by this, just glad that this archaelogical dig in the Shephelah has confirmed biblical statements about King David and his reign in Hebron, before moving the seat of power to Jerusalem.



The link has nothing to do with claims about Solomon's temple as someone here wrongly thinks. For evidence about that, check Egyptologist David Rohl's book The Lost Testament pp 254-7, 297, 311, 331, 334, 341, 344, 349, 357, 360-1, 363, 366, 370, 372-4, 397-80, 385, 389, 393-5, 414, 419, 424, 441, 443-4, 451-2 & 474. (Century 2002)

Answer 2

A more reputable news source:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57594747/archaeologists-claim-to-have-found-king-davids-palace-in-israel/



The fact that the location is 20 miles from Jerusalem cause me to think that it is not what the archaeologists claim of it - that it is not the palace of King David, because (according to the Bible) King David ruled from Jerusalem. 20 miles was a **very long distance** in King David's culture, where horseback riding had not yet been developed (they rode mules or donkeys for travel or horse-drawn chariots in battle, chariots not suitable for cross-country travel).



If it had been found in Jerusalem or just outside Jerusalem (within a mile), then it would correspond well with the Bible (even though the Bible does not mention that King David had a palace). The fact that it is 20 miles away makes me question - not the identification as a palace - but the identification of King David's palace. Remember: David ruled for 40 years. It could easily be a structure built by Solomon or Saul - or by the Philistines or others who (according to the Bible) ruled the region less than 100 years before the time of David. From the article:



"Critics said the site could have belonged to other kingdoms of the area. The consensus among most scholars is that no definitive physical proof of the existence of King David has been found."



Make no mistake: if it is discovered that the palace belonged to King David in particular, or Saul or Solomon, that's great. However, the owner of the palace **has not yet been determined with evidence**. I'll wait until the evidence is equal to the claim before I agree that it is "the discovery of the century".



- Jim, http://www.bible-reviews.com/

Answer 3

It won't help at all.



They found Noah's Ark for crying out loud and the world ignored it. As soon as they cored for samples and got extinct animal hair from them - they shut it down.



They'll do the same with this - the Central Gov'ts of the world are controlled by the HIghest Occult who have no intention of letting their little evolutionary model go bust on them just when they're about to enslave mankind with it and their alien revelation show.

Answer 4

At the very least it shows a vast palace existed in the 10th century BC, which, indeed, had been considered pretty much impossible.



I notice that in that somewhat biased piece they did not mention any reference to David himself in the finds so far, though.



"This should help Christians with their apologetics of the OT,

with their knowing the bible is very true and accurate."



Wow. You should represent your country in the Olympics, if you can make leaps that big.

Answer 5

I have not followed your links, but I assume this is Professor Simon Garfunkel of the Jerusalem University of Frummage 'discovering' King Solomon's temple again. With the original magic pillars of the freemasons and a finest kind Acme® Ark of the Covenant.



No he hasn't. He has gone poking about in a 10th Century BC fortress, and I hope he hasn't done any damage. The consensus among real Israeli archaeologists is that the 'Kingdom of Solomon' didn't exist as such. Most of his claims are ill-informed or worse.

Answer 6

That's good but the Muslims have pretty much taken over Jerusalem so they'll probably want that too.

Answer 7

I've never heard that King David never existed. Where did you get that from?



It is hard to help Christians when you start encouraging them with lies.

Answer 8

you don't have to prove the bibles historical accounts, yes the Roman empire occupied Jerusalem that doesn't "prove" the bible is true. just one already known fact. it the question of Jesus' divinity that you need to prove.

Answer 9

What does "request they are left off if you can do that." mean? It doesn't seem to make sense.

Answer 10

This guy has been making this one for weeks.

Answer 11

I think it good