TheFinalWord Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Pretty interesting! ----------------------------- JERUSALEM (AP) — A team of Israeli archaeologists believes it has discovered the ruins of a palace belonging to the biblical King David, but other Israeli experts dispute the claim. Archaeologists from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel’s Antiquities Authority said their find, a large fortified complex west of Jerusalem at a site called Khirbet Qeiyafa, is the first palace of the biblical king ever to be discovered. “Khirbet Qeiyafa is the best example exposed to date of a fortified city from the time of King David,” said Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist, suggesting that David himself would have used the site. Mr. Garfinkel led the seven-year dig with Saar Ganor of Israel’s Antiquities Authority. Mr. Garfinkel said his team found cultic objects typically used by Judeans, the subjects of King David, and saw no trace of pig remains. Pork is forbidden under Jewish dietary laws. Clues such as these, he said, were “unequivocal evidence” that David and his descendants had ruled at the site. 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. Biblical archaeology itself is contentious. Israelis often use archaeological findings to back up their historic claims to sites that are also claimed by the Palestinians, such as the Old City of Jerusalem. Despite extensive archaeological evidence, for example, Palestinians deny that the biblical Jewish Temples dominated the hilltop where the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, Islam’s third-holiest site, stands today. In general, researchers are divided over whether biblical stories can be validated by physical remains. The current excavators are not the first to claim they had found a King David palace. In 2005, Israeli archaeologist Eilat Mazar said she found the remains of King David’s palace in Jerusalem dating to the 10th century B.C., when King David would have ruled. Her claim also attracted skepticism, including from Mr. Garfinkel himself. Using carbon dating, the archaeologists traced the site’s construction to that same period. Mr. Garfinkel said the team also found a storeroom almost 50 feet long, suggesting it was a royal site used to collect taxes from the rest of the kingdom. Mr. Garfinkel believes King David lived permanently in Jerusalem in a yet-undiscovered site, only visiting Khirbet Qeiyafa or other palaces for short periods. He said the site’s placement on a hill indicates that the ruler sought a on high ground during a violent era of frequent conflicts between city-states. “The time of David was the first time that a large portion of this area was united by one monarch,” Mr. Garfinkel said. “It was not a peaceful era.” Archaeologist Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University agreed that Khirbet Qeiyafa is an “elaborate” and “well-fortified” 10th century B.C. site, but said it could have been built by Philistines, Canaanites or other peoples in the area. He said there was no way to verify who built the site without finding a monument detailing the accomplishments of the king who built it. Last week, for instance, archaeologists in Israel found pieces of a sphinx bearing the name of the Egyptian pharaoh who reigned when the statue was carved. Mr. Garfinkel insisted that critics such as Mr. Finkelstein are relying on outdated theories. “I think other people have a collapsed theory and we have fresh data,” he said. Read more: King David's palace found: Israeli team - Washington Times ----------------- Great movie if interested in learning more about David... My part of the story of David is when he condemns himself (exposes our own hypocrisy) King David Full Movie - YouTube 3 Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Have they found my feather duster? I swear I must have dropped it behind the throne while I was cleaning the steps..... Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted July 21, 2013 Author Share Posted July 21, 2013 Have they found my feather duster? I swear I must have dropped it behind the throne while I was cleaning the steps..... I'm not even going to ask why you clean your toilet with a feather duster Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 We all have our foibles, duckie...... Link to post Share on other sites
pie2 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) Very exciting stuff! I love when science is used to verify the bible's accounts. I wonder how much evidence was needed to prove the palaces, castle's etc. of other non-Christian/Jewish historical figures? Even if this discovery hasn't gotten full backing from the entire archeological/historical communities, it's just one more step in uncovering some of the most beautiful mysteries on earth. Thanks for posting. Edited July 23, 2013 by pie2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Very exciting stuff! I love when science is used to verify the bible's accounts. 'Science' has verified nothing. The whole matter is still entirely conjecture, and nobody has any certainty about this discovery at all. I wonder how much evidence was needed to prove the palaces, castle's etc. of other non-Christian/Jewish historical figures? Documentation, historical archives and verifiable sources of writings usually help. Something along the lines of "King Henry the VIII was given Hampton Court by Wolsey before he died." usually hits the mark.... Even if this discovery hasn't gotten full backing from the entire archeological/historical communities, it's just one more step in uncovering some of the most beautiful mysteries on earth. No it doesn't. It just proves people could build beautifully without Black & Decker work benches and hammer drills. What's mysterious about that? Link to post Share on other sites
The Introvert Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Aaaah TFW, thanks for the post I believe King David was a 'man after God's heart' as the holy scriptures say.Though he committed adultery rape (raped Uriah's wife) and murder (Uriah) he still asked God to forgive him and he was forgiven but he faced the consequences of his sins------sorry,off -topic! 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 Aaaah TFW, thanks for the post I believe King David was a 'man after God's heart' as the holy scriptures say.Though he committed adultery rape (raped Uriah's wife) and murder (Uriah) he still asked God to forgive him and he was forgiven but he faced the consequences of his sins------sorry,off -topic! My favorite part of the story is God using the underdog The Lord said to Samuel, “How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him as king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and be on your way; I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem. I have chosen one of his sons to be king.” But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” Then Jesse called Abinadab and had him pass in front of Samuel. But Samuel said, “The Lord has not chosen this one either.” Jesse then had Shammah pass by, but Samuel said, “Nor has the Lord chosen this one.” Jesse had seven of his sons pass before Samuel, but Samuel said to him, “The Lord has not chosen these.” So he asked Jesse, “Are these all the sons you have?” “There is still the youngest,” Jesse answered. “He is tending the sheep.” So he sent for him and had him brought in. He was glowing with health and had a fine appearance and handsome features.Then the Lord said, “Rise and anoint him; this is the one.” So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon David Link to post Share on other sites
pureinheart Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Pretty interesting! ----------------------------- JERUSALEM (AP) — A team of Israeli archaeologists believes it has discovered the ruins of a palace belonging to the biblical King David, but other Israeli experts dispute the claim. Archaeologists from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel’s Antiquities Authority said their find, a large fortified complex west of Jerusalem at a site called Khirbet Qeiyafa, is the first palace of the biblical king ever to be discovered. “Khirbet Qeiyafa is the best example exposed to date of a fortified city from the time of King David,” said Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist, suggesting that David himself would have used the site. Mr. Garfinkel led the seven-year dig with Saar Ganor of Israel’s Antiquities Authority. Mr. Garfinkel said his team found cultic objects typically used by Judeans, the subjects of King David, and saw no trace of pig remains. Pork is forbidden under Jewish dietary laws. Clues such as these, he said, were “unequivocal evidence” that David and his descendants had ruled at the site. 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. Biblical archaeology itself is contentious. Israelis often use archaeological findings to back up their historic claims to sites that are also claimed by the Palestinians, such as the Old City of Jerusalem. Despite extensive archaeological evidence, for example, Palestinians deny that the biblical Jewish Temples dominated the hilltop where the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, Islam’s third-holiest site, stands today. In general, researchers are divided over whether biblical stories can be validated by physical remains. The current excavators are not the first to claim they had found a King David palace. In 2005, Israeli archaeologist Eilat Mazar said she found the remains of King David’s palace in Jerusalem dating to the 10th century B.C., when King David would have ruled. Her claim also attracted skepticism, including from Mr. Garfinkel himself. Using carbon dating, the archaeologists traced the site’s construction to that same period. Mr. Garfinkel said the team also found a storeroom almost 50 feet long, suggesting it was a royal site used to collect taxes from the rest of the kingdom. Mr. Garfinkel believes King David lived permanently in Jerusalem in a yet-undiscovered site, only visiting Khirbet Qeiyafa or other palaces for short periods. He said the site’s placement on a hill indicates that the ruler sought a on high ground during a violent era of frequent conflicts between city-states. “The time of David was the first time that a large portion of this area was united by one monarch,” Mr. Garfinkel said. “It was not a peaceful era.” Archaeologist Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University agreed that Khirbet Qeiyafa is an “elaborate” and “well-fortified” 10th century B.C. site, but said it could have been built by Philistines, Canaanites or other peoples in the area. He said there was no way to verify who built the site without finding a monument detailing the accomplishments of the king who built it. Last week, for instance, archaeologists in Israel found pieces of a sphinx bearing the name of the Egyptian pharaoh who reigned when the statue was carved. Mr. Garfinkel insisted that critics such as Mr. Finkelstein are relying on outdated theories. “I think other people have a collapsed theory and we have fresh data,” he said. Read more: King David's palace found: Israeli team - Washington Times ----------------- Great movie if interested in learning more about David... My part of the story of David is when he condemns himself (exposes our own hypocrisy) King David Full Movie - YouTube I relate to King David big time:D It's my hope they are able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was King David's pad. I think they will. Link to post Share on other sites
pie2 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 'Science' has verified nothing. The whole matter is still entirely conjecture, and nobody has any certainty about this discovery at all. I consider the "archaeologists from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel’s Antiquities Authority" to be professional scientists who are experts in their field. I think if I were to make judgments about the situation from my living room, then you could call that "entirely conjecture". Documentation, historical archives and verifiable sources of writings usually help. Something along the lines of "King Henry the VIII was given Hampton Court by Wolsey before he died." usually hits the mark.... I'm not sure what you mean regarding Henry the VIII. But verifying the existence of someone who was around 500 years ago, as opposed to 3000 years ago, is very different. Not sure which documents and verifiable sources of writing you mean. The bible is offered as a verifiable source of information (containing historical records that are matched against other records), but most people dismiss it. It just proves people could build beautifully without Black & Decker work benches and hammer drills. What's mysterious about that? No question that mankind has created beautiful things for thousands of years. However, I was referring to the discovery of more and more clues that point to the accuracy of the beautiful stories in the bible, which are some of the most beautiful mysteries in the world to me. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I consider the "archaeologists from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel’s Antiquities Authority" to be professional scientists who are experts in their field. I think if I were to make judgments about the situation from my living room, then you could call that "entirely conjecture". Archaeologists are not 'scientists'. All they have at their disposal (to put it broadly) is similar discoveries they can link to and compare artefacts and constructions to. They rely on the co-operational work of data scientists and analysts to verify their findings. So far, nothing has been proven, therefore, it IS total conjecture. I'm not sure what you mean regarding Henry the VIII. But verifying the existence of someone who was around 500 years ago, as opposed to 3000 years ago, is very different. That's true. Any data is going to be far more reliable. Not sure which documents and verifiable sources of writing you mean. The bible is offered as a verifiable source of information (containing historical records that are matched against other records), but most people dismiss it. That ISN'T true. The Bible simply doesn't bear scrutiny because there is nothing there which proves anything. The Bible is probably the LEAST reliable source of information an historian/Archaeologist/Scientist would rely on. It's simply unverifiable, because it's not precise enough. No question that mankind has created beautiful things for thousands of years. However, I was referring to the discovery of more and more clues..... 'Clues'? Don't you mean, evidence? A clue is just another possible pointer. It proves nothing. ....that point to the accuracy of the beautiful stories in the bible, which are some of the most beautiful mysteries in the world to me. If they're 'accurate' they're not a mystery, surely? Such as....? Could you cite some stories in the OT Bible which have been proven beyond doubt to be accurate? Link to post Share on other sites
pureinheart Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 That ISN'T true. The Bible simply doesn't bear scrutiny because there is nothing there which proves anything. The Bible is probably the LEAST reliable source of information an historian/Archaeologist/Scientist would rely on. It's simply unverifiable, because it's not precise enough. Serious question, and have wanted to ask this in the past. How do we know of anything being accurate historically speaking- because someone said so, writings that have been handed down, then their information matches the find or vise versa. As far as scientific methods, there are some I question and some that make sense. I lack understanding. Link to post Share on other sites
M30USA Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Taramaiden, how can you say the bible is "the least accurate" historical document when Isaac Newton (also a historian) used it as a reference for his book "The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms" in 1728? Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Isaac Newton is known to very probably have had a severe personality disorder. While a lot of his scientific work is commendable, much of his personal shenanigans stink. He was almost manic about his religious tendencies and was devout to the point of excessive and extreme fervour. A trait that many would look upon with some degree of alarm nowadays. His bias towards God and Religion was considered peculiar, even then. Edited July 24, 2013 by TaraMaiden Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 Pretty cool video showing more of the site as well as commentary from the lead archeologist: Link to post Share on other sites
pie2 Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Archaeologists are not 'scientists'. The Bible is probably the LEAST reliable source of information an historian/Archaeologist/Scientist would rely on. Seems we have a differing point of view. I do think archeology is a science, which uses scientific methods (see archeological science). And of course we don't agree on the bible either . Regarding information we have today that helps uncover some of our ancient past, there are countless sites that offer us clues to the mystery of God and Jesus. Please read here for a summary of just a few places Link to post Share on other sites
pie2 Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Pretty cool video showing more of the site as well as commentary from the lead archeologist: It's really beautiful there, and the ruins are so extensive. It's such a short distance from Jerusalem...I can only wonder what else is left to be discovered. Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 (edited) Seems we have a differing point of view. I do think archeology is a science, which uses scientific methods (see archeological science). And of course we don't agree on the bible either . Regarding information we have today that helps uncover some of our ancient past, there are countless sites that offer us clues to the mystery of God and Jesus. Please read here for a summary of just a few places Interesting. All the findings are 'supposedly', 'thought to be' and 'controversial', and the remains of the so-called 'Walls of Jericho' have been dismissed as highly doubtful. The list of FALSE artefacts and findings is actually longer..... I keep forgetting it's almost impossible to argue with blind faith. When people become so fixed on a myth and decide it MUST be true, no amount of earth-shattering fact is going to shift their perspective. I'm out. Edited July 25, 2013 by TaraMaiden Link to post Share on other sites
angel.eyes Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Pretty cool video showing more of the site as well as commentary from the lead archeologist: Fascinating! Thanks for sharing this. I had not heard of the discovery before. Really cool! It will be interesting to see how things unfold over time. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts