In Jewish Sacred Literature that was later included in the Old Testament of the Christians, we are introduced to King David of the United Kingdoms of Israel and Judah and his successor and son, King Solomon. For millennia these individuals have been accepted as historical figures of great import, yet more and more their actual existence (at least as portrayed) is being questioned. We can name all of the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt, we have monuments that they had created, documents of their actions, treaties they signed, mention of them by other nations and their tombs (sometimes their corpses too). We know the names of the Kings of Persia (the King of Kings), as with the Egyptians we have the monuments, documents, etc. We can repeat this with every ancient state in that area, even small city states such as Ugarit and Tyre, but when it comes to the illustrious King David and his even more venerated son Solomon, not a single shred of evidence. Not one monument, not one egotistical carving declaring that either King defeated an enemy or dedicated something to YHWH, not one document (Israelite, Babylonian, Egyptian, Assyrian, Hittite or other nation) mentions either King. Even Hiram of Tyre, supposedly a good buddy of Solomon, never mentions ol’ Solly at all. When it comes to evidence of either King, as the saying goes, the silence is deafening! It’s almost as if they never existed!
A lot of Christians scurry around attempting to prove the existence of these individuals with such things as the Bytdwd inscription and the Dawat inscription of Egypt. There are problems with the authenticity of the Bytdwd inscription, that not to be addressed here, that tend to be epigraphist and translation problems and then there is the problem that the last letter before a break is continued down the side of the break, indicative of a forgery. The last I heard on that was that it was being investigated. The problem with the Dawat inscription is that even creative translation can not make the inscription h(y)dbtdwt read as the heights of David as the Christians would want it to. Christians constantly state that lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, a rather ridiculous saying at best. Actually lack of evidence is nearly always lack of existence, especially after an exhaustive search for evidence of existence. We know from the Ebla clay tablets find that various Ugarite and Canaanite deities bore the names of Da'ud (David), Sau'lus (Saul) amongst others, since these tablets predate even Abraham what chances King David as described by the bible authors actually existed ?

Yes. No evidence whatsoever. This is quite suspicious. It is becoming very clear that much of the biblical tales were borrowed from the myths of other cultures not only in the middle east but as far as India.
Till date ,there has been no historical, literary or archeological evidence to onfirm the mere existence of these two very important biblical characters. The psalms, attributed to King david, are beleived to be copied from ancient egyptian texts and bear great resemblence to one titled "Hymns To Ra". The proverbs, attributed to King Solomon, are found in the book called the Egyptian book of the dead, copied from a much earlier text titled" The Precepts of Ptah-Hotep", written by an Egyptian priest of the old kingdom. These texts predate the bible by thousands of years.
The entire ten commandments and the lords prayer can also be found in this same text almost verbatim.
It is quite obvious that the Isrealite priests and scribes, while in exile in Babylon in around 650Bc, decided to formulate a historical narrative for the benefit of future generations of Isrealites as a way to instill pride and keep them united in the face of the imminent disintegration. They borrowed heavily from Egyptian, Babylonian and ancient Mesopotamian sources to compile the old testament books. It was just a simple matter of substituting thier Diety, yahweh /Jehova in place of the dieties of the other cultures from whom much of their theological narratives were borrowed.

na mumu dey wori una, when una tire una drink tea

I agree with you in many respects that Israelite scribes drew heavily on other sources. None more so apparent than in the Psalms which we now know to be almost word for word copies of the Ugaritic texts, of particular interest is 1 Kings 22 :19-20 where we read of YHWH meeting his heavenly council, the very description of heaven described in the Ugaritic texts where the sons of God are the sons of 'El'. In addition, we now know that various deities worshipped in Ugarit i.e El Shaddai, El Elyon e.t.c were all names applied to YHWH, in other words Hebrew theologians simply adopted the titles of Canaanite gods and applied them to YHWH in order to eliminate them.

Back to David though, we find there is a singular lack of evidence, archaeological and historical for David, Solomon or the United Kingdom for that matter. A lack that is highlighted by the myriad of evidence available for kings and nations that were supposedly less famous and the myriad of evidence for the individuals of the “king lists” of Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Persia, Tyre, etc and for the very nations and city states that they ruled. As with nations today, these various states of the ancient world maintained a diplomatic service that communicated with their counterparts of other nations. The dry climate of Egypt preserved the archives of the Egyptian diplomatic corps and the use of clay as a medium for inscription (baked afterwards into stone-like consistency) preserved the archives of the other ancient nations. In none of the archives excavated in all of the ancient sites, not one missive to or from David or Solomon, men that supposedly controlled an empire to rival that of their western, southern, and eastern neighbors, nor was there any addressed to (nor from) any ruler of Israel until the 9th century BCE, now why is this ?

^^

This is the kind of article that is generated out of a lack of in-depth research and knowledge.

Lets leave the bible out for now, archaeologists and reputable historians have confirmed the existence of these great Kings.

But it is not as if God needs us to validate the genuineness of this scripture.

On the contrary, the article is generated out of a lot of research, amongst others, no less a person than the director of The institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, commenting after a recent excavation stated '' the way i understand the finds there is no evidence whatsoever of a great united monarchy which ruled Jerusalem over large territories He reported further from the dig at Megiddo that a number of structures previously attributed to Solomon had indeed been built long after his purported reign.

Other digs have thrown up information supplementing the scriptures, for instance we now have a better understanding of what happened to Jerusalem after it was captured by the Babylonians almost 3000 years ago. I'd be most interested to know which precise Archaeologists and historians have confirmed the existence of these great kings and more importantly, the evidence.

frosbel:

^^

This is the kind of article that is generated out of a lack of in-depth research and knowledge.

Lets leave the bible out for now, archaeologists and reputable historians have confirmed the existence of these great Kings.

But it is not as if God needs us to validate the genuineness of this scripture.

Could you post up some links to that confirmation, please?
Bibical archeology is of great interest to me.

OP- if your post is citing an article, could you please post up the link to the original?.
Many times the best part of an article is in the sources they cite and I like to follow these things through!
Thanks in advance.

edited to add.
This is what a quick google search found me:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/9/King%20David%20and%20Jerusalem-%20Myth%20and%20Reality

Cautious and reluctant to draw any conclusions, other than that jerusalem existed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/international/middleeast/05jerusalem.html

Linking proving the connection missing.
And her findings are not confirmed by any means
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat_Mazar

Here's a reference in BAR about the 'House of David' stele
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/artifacts-and-the-bible/the-tel-dan-inscription-the-first-historical-evidence-of-the-king-david-bible-story/

Even BAR refuses to draw any conclusions from it.

It's a tricky question.

^^

What !!!!!

You want me to do research for you

Use google and other free relaible material online.

You see this is the problem with Nigerian students, they want their 'professor's to do all the reserach and academic work for them.

But if you cannot find what you want, I am always here to help !!

Err, hardly the response I thought I'd get.
When someone doesn't want to post up their sources, it's ususually because they have none, in my experience.
Did you see what I'd posted up before your ill-considered reply?

And here's one last thing-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelomit_seal

Dr. Mazel was obliged to alter her interpretation of the Shelomite seal.

Now why not be open about your sources, frosbel, or are we to think you simply made up your claim?
After all, the claim is yours.
Defend it.

Try this for starters

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4955427/k.3D58/Archaeology_and_the_Old_Testament.htm

I am ready for a very good debate

@ PA1982 Here is a link for a source i have used

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/29/arts/bible-history-flunks-new-archaeological-tests-hotly-debated-studies-cast-doubt.html?scp=1&sq=july%2029%202000&st=cse

Ansel1:

@ PA1982 Here is a link for a source i have used

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/29/arts/bible-history-flunks-new-archaeological-tests-hotly-debated-studies-cast-doubt.html?scp=1&sq=july%2029%202000&st=cse

Thanks! It's from 2000 and I think my own list of links is considerably more recent. See what you think of them!
We'll talk more later!

frosbel:

Try this for starters

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4955427/k.3D58/Archaeology_and_the_Old_Testament.htm

I am ready for a very good debate

If this is an example of what you read, there's not much chance we'll debate.
That link went to a pathetically outof date source that should have been axed ages ago.

Even BAR is more reliable as a source! Or even BAS.
Really, frosbel, I can only assume you're trolling me.

From frosbel's source and I kid you not:

Fourth, thousands of archives have been discovered, but an enormous amount of material has been lost. For example, the library in Alexandria held over one million volumes, but all were lost in a seventh century fire.

Was this written for 12year olds or what?

^^

I better leave you to your debate , since you have mentioned the word trolling which is something strange to my ears and integrity.

Carry on with your search.

Truthfully ,

FROSBEL

friend,

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” -2 Timothy 3:16-17

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." - 2 Peter 1:21

"Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God." - 2 Samuel 23:1-6

"Thus David the son of Jesse reigned over all Israel. And the time that he reigned over Israel was forty years; seven years reigned he in Hebron, and thirty and three years reigned he in Jerusalem. And he died in a good old age, full of days, riches, and honour: and Solomon his son reigned in his stead. Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer, With all his reign and his might, and the times that went over him, and over Israel, and over all the kingdoms of the countries." - 1 Chronicles 29:26-30

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." -Psalm 12:6

"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." - John 17:17

,

frosbel, sorry to have offended you with the word trolling!
It was an inexcusable lack of sensitivity on my part.
And I most deeply apologise for it.

But back to that article you linked-
it even discusses the fall of Jericho without taking into account the latest datings done on the grain found on site.
The article really isn't up to par, you know.

HISchild, thanks for posting the OT quotes about King David. When were they written?

On the subject of Jericho, from Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho

The first scientific investigation of the site of Jericho was carried out by Charles Warren in 1868, but amounted to no more than a site-survey (Warren's prime interest was in establishing the modern equivalents of Biblical locales). In 1907-09 and again in 1911 digging was carried out by two German archaeologists, Carl Watzinger and Ernest Sellin. Watzinger and Sellin believed that they would be able to validate the Biblical story of Jericho's destruction by Joshua and the Israelites, but concluded instead that the data indicated that the city was unoccupied at the time which the Bible indicated for the Conquest.

These results were tested in 1930-36 by John Garstang, at the suggestion of William F. Albright, the doyen of Palestinian archaeology at the time. Garstang discovered the remains of a network of collapsed walls which he dated to about 1400 BCE, the time he believed the Israelites were on their conquest, that had apparently fallen in a dramatic fashion as opposed to being ruined by abandonment or decay from natural forces. Garstang's work thus reversed the conclusions of the earlier diggings.

By the post-war period a revolution had occurred in archaeological methodology, and Albright accordingly asked Kathleen Kenyon, one of the most respected practitioners of the new archaeology, to excavate at Jericho once more. Kenyon dug at Jericho over the seasons between 1952-1958. Kenyon traced the entire history of the city from the earliest Neolithic settlement. She did this by digging a narrow deep trench maintaining clean, squared off edges, rigorously examining the soil and recording its stratification, and thus building up a cross-section of the tell. When presented with an area that would require wider areas to be excavated - the floor plan of a house for example - she carefully dug in measured squares while leaving an untouched strip between each section to allow the stratification to remain visible. Kenyon reported that her work showed Garstang to have been wrong and the Germans right - Jericho had been deserted at the accepted Biblical date of the Conquest. Her result was confirmed in 1995 by radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction to 1562 BCE (plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%.[2]

This is why it's so important to keep up to date on historical findings.

Off to hunt out more on the subject of Kings David and Solomon.

PA1982:

frosbel, sorry to have offended you with the word trolling!
It was an inexcusable lack of sensitivity on my part.
And I most deeply apologise for it.

But back to that article you linked-
it even discusses the fall of Jericho without taking into account the latest datings done on the grain found on site.
The article really isn't up to par, you know.

HISchild, thanks for posting the OT quotes about King David. When were they written?

It's fine , just that I do not troll, the Muslims might think different though.

Anyway in a sort of hurry now , maybe later in the evening.

Truthfully,

FROSBEL

@PA1982 Many thanks for the sources provided, I am familiar with them. As you have pointed out nothing really is conclusive, the so-called ''David Palace'' is more likely a ''Jebusite'' structure in my estimation and of course the seal is dated post exilic, we still await final and conclusive reports and peer reviews.

@Frosbel, the less said about that site, the better.

In all probability a King David might have existed as a minor ruler of a hilltop kingdom but certainly not on the scale as represented in the scriptures, more likely the stele and inscriptions are supplication artifacts to the deity Da'ud, just a thought.

Ansel1, glad to see you're familiar with those links!
Bibical archeology is a delicate subject, the many invasions of the sites and destructions make what is a difficult subject more so.
Religious sensibilities come into play, especially when it's clear a dearly held mythos (often cherished for aesthetic and emotional reasons) that's put into review.

This is my own case, as I truly believe the world would be a poorer place without stained glass, often inspired by bibical accounts.
Still, the glass remains to be enjoyed!
And Bach's cantatas.

But this is off topic, sorry!
Back to the OP.
A question, Ansel1- does Bethel mean dwelling place or dynasty?

PA1982, Quite right biblical archaeology is a bit of a minefield particularly when increasingly archaeologists and scholars are split into camps. People are rarely if ever objective where religion is concerned. ''Bethel'' in my view is a dwelling place, I am not aware it has been used to signify a dynasty. The Ugaritic texts refer to Bethel as meaning ''House of El'' or House of God, Wiki

Precisely, Ansel1, that's why the claims it refers to a dynasty have always jarred on me.

LagosShia- while I can well understand the tensions resulting from the Muslim bashing I've seen here, admittedly perpetrated by a vociferous minority, I do beg you tp please remember those tensions can only abate in a secular context.
Religious fanaticism is ugly no matter what label it carries.
We're all in the same boat and we all want to arrive to a safe haven, don't we?

Its not surprising that various Christian scholars have tried to interprete the  ''BYTDWD'' inscriptions as referring to a dynasty since the alternative is to accept the blindingly obvious that it was an instrument of worship to a deity, understandably there is a certain coyness. However the scriptures themselves are the best proof that deity worship was prevalent amongst the Hebrews, for instance;

We see biblical criticisms of the worship of other deities, such as the goddess Asherah in 2 Kings 21 and 23, as well as apparent references to this goddess or at least her symbol in the inscriptions from Kuntillet 'Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom in the eighth century. In the Kuntillet 'Ajrud inscriptions, the symbol is treated respectfully as part of the worship of Yahweh, so there is ambivalence. The gods Resheph and Deber appear in Habakkuk 3: as part of the military retinue of Yahweh. Other deities who gain some mention in the Bible include the "hosts of heaven" criticized in 2 Kings 21:5, but mentioned without such criticism in 1 Kings 22:19, in Zephaniah 1:5 its all hell broken loose. You may also note that the god El is identified with Yahweh in the Bible, again with no criticism. Psalm 82 is a kicker in that it is explicit in presenting the god El presiding in a divine assembly at which Yahweh stands up and makes his accusation against the other gods. The fact is that the worship of other deities in Israel persisted till at least the period of the exile circa 586.

@ PA1982

Pls, "Let GOD be magnified"

humbly, and from all indications, (The Lord GOD knows all things), they were likely written between 1007 B.C. and 967 B.C., likely no later than 931 B.C.

Could you give a source for that information, please, HISchild?

@PA1982,

The holy Bible, GOD's word, is the only source of our authority, mercifully, The Lord has provided so much information (which only we can understand if/when HE opens our eyes to see). Re: timeline, etc, i will give you an illustration beginning from adam, the first man, who lived to be 930 years old,

"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos: And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan: And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died." -Genesis 5:1-11,

the end of this chapter stops @ Noah and his sons, and Noah's father before him, Lamech (which is the time of the great flood), which occurred on the 17th day of the second month of that year (May 21 according to our current calendar)

"And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son: And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed. And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died. And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth." - Genesis 5:28-32

then, Gen 7:
"And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth." - Genesis 7:6

"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." - Genesis 7:11

Abram (Abraham) came from Noah's line (specifically, Shem, I believe), and then Abraham begat Isaac, then he Jacob (Israel) and Joseph, the nation of Israel spent 430 years of captivity / slavery in Egypt until GOD brought them out with a mighty Hand and an outstretched arm, , they had judges and then kings, whose number of years of their individual reigns over Israel and/or Judah were all chronicled (1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, etc),

So, my point is, GOD has mercifully provided all this information in HIS holy word, The Bible, re: the timeline of the history of this world, up until it's very end, the end of the age. The numbers are there, we see only by HIS grace and mercy and perfect will.

To GOD be all glory.

Thanks for the timeline, HISchild.
I appreciate your effort to post that.

To my mind, it seems important to make sure the seal is authentic and not a modern hoax.
Off to see what BAR has to say about this.

To GOD be all the glory.

Yes, which is why the truth is so important.
Not only is the age of the artefact important, but actually what it says.
This is why we're discussing the meaning of the word 'bethel'.

Whatever the provenance and meaning of this artefact, it neither proves nor denies anyone's faith.

Should the historical existence (or lack thereof) of these personages have any impact on the question of belief or non-belief in the existence of, and worship of, a universal creator?

^^^Archeology is fascinating because the next discovery is simply there waiting to be found.
And to answer your question- it's outside the scope of the thread, which is evaluating the evidence David and Solomon existed as historical personages.
Why not start a new thread on the subject?