Archaeologica.org

Then tell them the truth.

Until sometime after 722 BC it was a nothing little village which then experienced rapid growth.

i did and jerusalem was a bustling city long before 722 b.c..

Such is the case with David and Solomon, who are depicted in the biblical narrative as founding fathers of the ancient Israelite state. Yet we can now say - as we will argue in considerable detail throughout this book - that many of the famous episodes in the biblical story of David and Solomon are fictions, historically questionable or highly exaggerated. In the following chapters we will present archaeological evidence to show that there was no united monarchy of Israel in the way that the Bible describes it. Although it seems probable that David and Solomon were actual historical characters, they were very different from their scriptual portraits. We will show that it is highly unlikely that David ever conquered territories of peoples more than a day or two's march from the heartland of Judah. We will suggest that Solomon's Jerusalem was neither extensive nor impressive, but rather the rough hilltop stronghold of a local dynasty of rustic tribal chiefs.

i would like to see his 'proof'. i contest his statements made above as i think he is working from limited data and key words he uses above demonstrate his inabilty to prove his theory.

those key words are: 'highly unlikely' and 'suggest'. the former he uses for king david and the latter he uses for solomon. both indicate the shaky ground he is on plus his publication date would have allowed him to be aware of mazar's discovery.

since i haven't read this book yet, i can't say if he ignores the find and the evidence or if he just dismisses it like minimalist does to all evidence that disagrees with him. i guess i am at a point i will have to order and read it.

i find through the quotes that are provided a researcher eho is not out to find the truth but to fill his own political agenda and feather his own cap at the expense of his own people.

but knowing what jews did to jews during the second world war, this is not a new activity.

taken from amazon.com the following quote is from siberman, co-author of finkelstein's book, david and solomon.

In David and Solomon, we present some dramatic new archaeological discoveries and interpretations that challenge the conventional wisdom about the history of the Davidic dynasty and the western messianic tradition.

as you can see, they are not representing their work as fact but as an interpretation that challenges traditional thinking. a big difference between the two positions.

Desperation is showing through again, arch.

Try, try, try, to keep in mind that mainstream archaeology agrees with Finkelstein....and not with bible thumping morons.

Desperation is showing through again, arch

i am not being desparate, just showing the whole picture.

You've never seen the whole picture in your life. You deliberately avoid the work of any scholar who questions the pretty little fairy tales you subscribe to.

You may as well stick your head in the sand.

You've never seen the whole picture in your life. You deliberately avoid the work of any scholar who questions the pretty little fairy tales you subscribe to.

you refuse to give me credit for looking at the evidence and being able to make up my own mind. something that you do, you just hate it that i have rebuffed yours and the minimalist camp's ways by making an intelligent decision.

you only tink that an intelligent decision is rejecting the Bible, well sorry but i have the freedom to choose what i want to follow and it isn't dumb. i have seenthe evidence the minimalist camp offers for 30 years and it isn't anything i would want to be a part of.

i will take the hard road and stick with the Bible.

Off topic but sorta pertinent

The human brain is hard-wired to be susceptible to supernatural beliefs as a result of tens of thousands of years of evolution, a British psychologist said today.

Religion and other forms of magical thinking continue to thrive, in spite of a lack of evidence and the advance of science, because people are naturally biased to accept a role for the irrational in their daily lives, according to Bruce Hood, Professor of Experimental Psychology at the University of Bristol.

This evolved credulity suggests that it will be impossible to root out belief in ideas such as creationism and paranormal phenomena, even though they have been refuted by evidence and are held as a matter of faith alone.

People ultimately believe in them for the same reasons as they attach sentimental value to inanimate objects like wedding rings or teddy bears, and recoil from artefacts linked to evil, as if they are pervaded by a physical "essence".

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 21,00.html

archaeologist wrote:

You've never seen the whole picture in your life. You deliberately avoid the work of any scholar who questions the pretty little fairy tales you subscribe to.

you refuse to give me credit for looking at the evidence and being able to make up my own mind. something that you do, you just hate it that i have rebuffed yours and the minimalist camp's ways by making an intelligent decision.

you only tink that an intelligent decision is rejecting the Bible, well sorry but i have the freedom to choose what i want to follow and it isn't dumb. i have seenthe evidence the minimalist camp offers for 30 years and it isn't anything i would want to be a part of.

i will take the hard road and stick with the Bible.

You still think that screaming "BIBLE, BIBLE, BIBLE" constitutes proof.

It constitutes shit. The rest of the world has moved so far beyond you it is ridiculous. Feel free to believe what you wish but when you post those beliefs on a science board continue to expect to be smacked down by reality.

but when you post those beliefs on a science board continue to expect to be smacked down by reality.

there it is again. when proven to be in the wrong you immediately fall back to this argument. you forget that sceince also supports the Bible, infact more so than the pithy interpretations your favorite archaeologists come up with.

but we are talking about jerusalem which seems to have caused you to stumble. i will post a link next that refers to the Zertal discovery. i haven't read it all and i wonder about it but it looks like good reading

You have never proven shit. You don't even try. You simply state that the bible is true and convince yourself....if no one else.

Religion is the providence of the biggest con men in the history of the world and you fall for their shit hook, line and sinker every time.

Those phonies must love you.