PA1982:

^^^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?

Archaelogy is beyond fascinating. It is actually one of my keener interests. So you do not touch upon that which I sought to convey. To rephrase - let me ask if there is any worth in grounding one's atheistic or theistic worldview on the veracity or otherwise of these stories - proven or unproven.

Should the faith of a pure Buddhist be altered if he finds for instance that the Buddha never existed? I would be interested in your response to that.

Hmmm.
This thread is about the historical evidence for David and Solomon.
You have every right to speculate on worldviews an archeology, of course.

Deep Sight:

, To rephrase - let me ask if there is any worth in grounding one's atheistic or theistic worldview on the veracity or otherwise of these stories - proven or unproven.

Should the faith of a pure Buddhist be altered if he finds for instance that the Buddha never existed? I would be interested in your response to that.

This would be the subject of a different thread.
Why go off-topic here when you can simply start a fresh thread?

PA1982:

Hmmm.
This thread is about the historical evidence for David and Solomon.
You have every right to speculate on worldviews an archeology, of course.

I doubt very much that this subject would be topical on this board if not for the sub-text: to wit - the possibility to discredit a faith. This is why I ask if indeed a faith can or should be discreditted on such grounds.

This would be the subject of a different thread.
Why go off-topic here when you can simply start a fresh thread?

I don't think that i'm off-topic. However I will oblige you and open a new thread with same questions.

PA1982:

Hmmm.
This thread is about the historical evidence for David and Solomon.
You have every right to speculate on worldviews an archeology, of course.
This would be the subject of a different thread.
Why go off-topic here when you can simply start a fresh thread?

You keep learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.

Do you not think this is most unfortunate 

Deep Sight:

I doubt very much that this subject would be topical on this board if not for the sub-text: to wit - the possibility to discredit a faith. This is why I ask if indeed a faith can or should be discreditted on such grounds.

I don't think that i'm off-topic. However I will oblige you and open a new thread with same questions.

Now I understand you.
Where do you think this thread would be better situated?
Why not discuss it with the OP, rather than a contributer?

Open the thread, as you will, Deep Sight. See you there.

frosbel:

You keep learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.

Do you not think this is most unfortunate 

Where did you find that little wordbite?
In a fortune cookie?
Do you have something about the historical evidence for Kings David and Solomon or not?

^^





You are indeed a funny person.

The bible is enough for me to believe. That's why we have a word called faith.

I guess faith to an non-believer is a foreign word.

In essence it all adds up , after a good read of the bible , my conclusion is , it is factual.

You can argue yourself into oblivion, but fact remains fact. Your time will be better spent exploring the deep truths of the bible to make you wise unto salvation or better still , keep mute about matters of which you have no insight !!!!

What does your personal faith have to do with the topic of this thread?
We're talking about history, not your personal views here.

OK time to put this thread in perspective.

1. First, the opening poster Ansel1 has already been proven to be a deliberate forger, plagiarist, cheat and fraud on a follow up thread. https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-759143.0.html#msg9154678

2. Even this very present thread is another instance of plagiarism. See http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=53466
  (EDIT:  and quite a number of other sites on the Internet actually)

3. The cheat who even claims accepted adulation and praise (and recommendation to write a book) for reproducing other people's work uses the grandiose "we know" when in truth s/he probably knows bugger all! Take one example: the cheat and plagiarist of all people(!) claims "we know" that the psalms are plagiarisms of Ugaritic material; well, let's assume for one moment that the cheat is someone to be taken seriously, thus compare (from a brief review of a 2009 book - and of course the best thing is to get and read the book itself):

This volume offers a fresh analysis of a central problem of comparative Ugaritic-Biblical scholarship: the relationship between biblical psalms and Canaanite literature. A critical survey summarises the various stages of comparative scholarship over fifty years. There follow the two principal parts of the book: the first concerns Hebrew psalms with affinities to Ugaritic literature, and the second Ugaritic psalms and prayers with affinities to Hebrew literature. A detailed analysis of the form, structure, themes and motifs of biblical texts, and a scrutiny of their verses, cola, phrases and vocabulary against the background of ancient Near East literature lead to the thesis that there is no justification for assuming that Canaanite psalms are found in the Bible, or that biblical literature and Ugaritic literature should be considered a single entity. It is alleged that affinities may be elucidated based on common thematic, linguistic and stylistic elements.

From http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ugaritic-Publications-Foundation-University-Jerusalem/dp/9652238643


I have always said that the evangelical atheists (and even some other anti-Christians) are only too happy to resort to intellectually dishonest  methods (and indeed other fraudulent means) in their desire to discredit Christianity in particular.

The pitiful thing is that many supposed "intellectuals" are also quite ready to take the words of the cheats as gospel, because it discredits Christianity, without even the most basic requirement of at least a cursory check for accuracy.

All good.

Even a post by the poster (post #4) in response to a question was lifted and plagiarised from another website!

Pitiful.

Plagiarists are plagues, confirm.
@op and friends.
Are we looking for the writings, sculptures and confirmations of herdsmen and uncivilised illiterates?

Image123:

Plagiarists are plagues, confirm.
@op and friends.
Are we looking for the writings, sculptures and confirmations of herdsmen and uncivilised illiterates?

Ah, here is another thing the evangelical atheists say, in their usual fraudulent manner, which people readily buy. Do they similarly refer to other writings of antiquity as the writings of "uncivilised" people. When did people like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle etc live, work and write?

@ Enigma
I find your signature quite funny but I wouldn't believe he would say so

Well, https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-704762.0.html

Happy reading.

Enigma:

Ah, here is another thing the evangelical atheists say, in their usual fraudulent manner, which people readily buy. Do they similarly refer to other writings of antiquity as the writings of "uncivilised" people. When did people like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle etc live, work and write?

Good to read your posts, Enigma!
A shame they have nothing to do with the OP, as I was hoping you'd have some insights on the subject.
Remember?
It about historical evidence for the Kings David and Solomon.

Plagarism is a tricky subject.
Sometimes it's about sloppy posting.
Sometimes it's about deliberate deception.

I'd encourage Nairalanders to cite their sources.
It makes for more interesting reading and allows people to investigate for themselves.
To me, any forum's worth is measured in the horizons it opens for me by way of information.

Now for your comments on

When did people like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle etc live, work and write?

Socrates, of course never wrote a word and was condemned to death by the Athenian assembly for teaching youth to disrespect the Greek gods.
Plato, his pupil, traveled extensively and tried, in vain, to educate  Dionysius the Younger, heir to Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse.

That effort is a fascinating story, by the way.
You'll find a decent introduction to it here:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/plato/

d. Later Trips to Sicily and Death

The first of Plato’s remaining two Sicilian adventures came after Dionysius I died and his young son, Dionysius II, ascended to the throne. His uncle/brother-in-law Dion persuaded the young tyrant to invite Plato to come to help him become a philosopher-ruler of the sort described in the Republic. Although the philosopher (now in his sixties) was not entirely persuaded of this possibility (Seventh Letter 328b-c), he agreed to go. This trip, like the last one, however, did not go well at all. Within months, the younger Dionysius had Dion sent into exile for sedition (Seventh Letter 329c, Third Letter 316c-d), and Plato became effectively under house arrest as the “personal guest” of the dictator (Seventh Letter 329c-330b).

Plato eventually managed to gain the tyrant’s permission to return to Athens (Seventh Letter 338a), and he and Dion were reunited at the Academy (Plut. Dion 17). Dionysius agreed that “after the war” (Seventh Letter 338a; perhaps the Lucanian War in 365 B.C.E.), he would invite Plato and Dion back to Syracuse (Third Letter 316e-317a, Seventh Letter 338a-b). Dion and Plato stayed in Athens for the next four years (c. 365-361 B.C.E.). Dionysius then summoned Plato, but wished for Dion to wait a while longer. Dion accepted the condition and encouraged Plato to go immediately anyway (Third Letter 317a-b, Seventh Letter 338b-c), but Plato refused the invitation, much to the consternation of both Syracusans (Third Letter 317a, Seventh Letter 338c). Hardly a year had passed, however, before Dionysius sent a ship, with one of Plato’s Pythagorean friends (Archedemus, an associate of Archytas—see Seventh Letter 339a-b and next section) on board begging Plato to return to Syracuse. Partly because of his friend Dion’s enthusiasm for the plan, Plato departed one more time to Syracuse. Once again, however, things in Syracuse were not at all to Plato’s liking. Dionysius once again effectively imprisoned Plato in Syracuse, and the latter was only able to escape again with help from his Tarentine friends ( Seventh Letter 350a-b).

Dion subsequently gathered an army of mercenaries and invaded his own homeland. But his success was short-lived: he was assassinated and Sicily was reduced to chaos. Plato, perhaps now completely disgusted with politics, returned to his beloved Academy, where he lived out the last thirteen years of his life.

Aristotle was, as you know, a great influence on Western philosophy.
Wikipedia has a good overview on him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle

As a curiosity, Aristotle, at the end of his long life, was also accused of not honouring the gods!

Anyway, enough of this digression about Greek philosophers- how about more on the subject of the OP?

PA1982:

Good to read your posts, Enigma!
A shame they have nothing to do with the OP, as I was hoping you'd have some insights on the subject.
Remember?
It about historical evidence for the Kings David and Solomon.

Thanks, and oh I do indeed know what the OP is supposed to be about; shame the OP stands on falsehood and deception.

PA1982:
Plagarism is a tricky subject.
Sometimes it's about sloppy posting.
Sometimes it's about deliberate deception.

Plagiarism is a very serious subject. The case of the opening poster falls into the deliberate deception category.

PA1982:
I'd encourage Nairalanders to cite their sources.
It makes for more interesting reading and allows people to investigate for themselves.

Yes, that is true.

PA1982:
To me, any forum's worth is measured in the horizons it opens for me by way of information.

But then it also matters what you do with the information and I say this for a particular reason i.e. my experience with you on another thread where you wrongly accuse some writers (including of material you found yourself) almost of deception whereas you were the one who chose to be dogmatic rather than objective about the arguments concerning the authorship of 2 Peter.

Second, what one can learn, in appropriate circumstances, is not limited to information alone; equally if not in fact more important is how to think, how to think objectively, how to think properly, how to think clearly.

PA1982:
Now for your comments on
Socrates, of course never wrote a word . . . . .

Ah ha, wunderbar! If Socrates never wrote a word, how do we know what his teachings actually were in original form?

Or have his "teachings" been "corrupted" by those whose writings point to them (remember another of your sweeping statements that the Bible has been "corrupted"?

PA1982:
Anyway, enough of this digression about Greek philosophers- how about more on the subject of the OP?

I am happy to leave those who are interested or those who have special or revelation knowledge of the subject to get on with it. I will watch and read happily and contribute if I have any useful thing to add whether directly or for clarification.

Glad to get a reply from you!
Sorry it isn't about the historical reality of the Kings David and Soloman!

Enigma:

Thanks, and oh I do indeed know what the OP is supposed to be about; shame the OP stands on falsehood and deception.

Plagiarism is a very serious subject. The case of the opening poster falls into the deliberate deception category.

I've read similar opinions elsewhere.
Who hasn't?
I notice you didn't disprove them, though.

I wonder if you are quite so sensitive to plagarism when it's done by someone who conforms to your worldview?

Enigma:

But then it also matters what you do with the information and I say this for a particular reason i.e. my experience with you on another thread where you wrongly accuse some writers (including of material you found yourself) almost of deception whereas you were the one who chose to be dogmatic rather than objective about the arguments concerning the authorship of 2 Peter.

Why do you bring up the contested works of 2 Peter here?
Can't you keep to a topic?
We've discussed  2Peter on another thread and if you want to continue, do so on the pertinent thread, instead of muddling the subjects together!
I think it was be a courtesy to the Nairaland readership, don't you?

Enigma:

Second, what one can learn, in appropriate circumstances, is not limited to information alone; equally if not in fact more important is how to think, how to think objectively, how to think properly, how to think clearly.

What does this have to do with the subject of King David?
Is there some reason not to learn about the historical evidence of King David?

Enigma:

Ah ha, wunderbar! If Socrates never wrote a word, how do we know what his teachings actually were in original form?

Or have his "teachings" been "corrupted" by those whose writings point to them (remember another of your sweeping statements that the Bible has been "corrupted"?

Of course I remember my 'sweeping' statement.
And I stand by it.
What do we know about Socrates?
Almost nothing.
His pupil, Plato, is an historical personage and I daresay a certain idealisation of his beloved professor very likely comes into play.
So.
Why bring up Socrates in a discussion of King David?

Enigma:

I am happy to leave those who are interested or those who have special or revelation knowledge of the subject to get on with it. I will watch and read happily and contribute if I have any useful thing to add whether directly or for clarification.

Well, thus far you've not added anything useful to the subject- it would be great if you did!

PA1982:

Glad to get a reply from you!
Sorry it isn't about the historical reality of the Kings David and Soloman!

I write what I choose, my dear; don't you know that by now?

PA1982:
I've read similar opinions elsewhere.
Who hasn't?
I notice you didn't disprove them, though.

When people want to believe the worst about Christianity rather than to look objectively at evidence, it is usually pointless to "debate" with them; but it is often necessary to point out their dogmatism, duplicity, sleight of hand etc. Even you yourself gave a link to an Israeli government website which says:

Until very recently, there was no evidence outside the Bible for the existence of King David. There are no references to him in Egyptian, Syrian or Assyrian documents of the time, and the many archaeological digs in the City of David failed to turn up so much as a mention of his name. Then, on July 21, 1993, a team of archaeologists led by Prof. Avraham Biran, excavating Tel Dan in the northern Galilee, found a triangular piece of basalt rock, measuring 23 x 36 cm. inscribed in Aramaic. It was subsequently identified as part of a victory pillar erected by the king of Syria and later smashed by an Israelite ruler. The inscription, which dates to the ninth century bce, that is to say, about a century after David was thought to have ruled Israel, includes the words Beit David ("House" or "Dynasty" of David". It is the first near-contemporaneous reference to David ever found. It is not conclusive; but it does strongly indicate that a king called David established a dynasty in Israel during the relevant period.

Another piece of significant evidence comes from Dr. Avi Ofer's archaeological survey conducted in the hills of Judea during the last decade, which shows that in the 11th-10th centuries bce, the population of Judah almost doubled compared to the preceding period. The so-called Rank Size Index (RSI), a method of analyzing the size and positioning of settlements to evaluate to what extent they were a self-contained group, indicates that during this period - David's supposed period - a strong centre of population existed at the edge of the region. Jerusalem is the most likely candidate for this centre.

To sum up the evidence then: in the tenth century bce, a dynasty was established by David; the population doubled in the hill country of Judah, which acquired a strong central point, probably Jerusalem, a previously settled site that was important enough to be mentioned in Egyptian documents. These facts are certainly consistent with the biblical account; but, before examining the biblical version, we should consider the nature of the Bible and of the historical material it contains.

Well, why not debate that first instead of asking me to "disprove" anything?

PA1982:

I wonder if you are quite so sensitive to plagarism when it's done by someone who conforms to your worldview?

I'm glad you only "wonder" because evidently you don't know me.

PA1982:
Why do you bring up the contested works of 2 Peter here?
Can't you keep to a topic?
We've discussed  2Peter on another thread and if you want to continue, do so on the pertinent thread, instead of muddling the subjects together!
I think it was be a courtesy to the Nairaland readership, don't you?

I would suggest you read the post again and maybe if you get the context in which the matter was brought up you will realise that it was pertinent.

PA1982:
What does this have to do with the subject of King David?
Is there some reason not to learn about the historical evidence of King David?

Well, why am I not surprised that you do not see the relevance of learning to think objectively and clearly?

PA1982:
Of course I remember my 'sweeping' statement.
And I stand by it.

A sweeping statement, proven to be misinformed; yet you accuse writers who weighed both sides almost of deception! Cool.

PA1982:

What do we know about Socrates?
Almost nothing.
His pupil, Plato, is an historical personage and I daresay a certain idealisation of his beloved professor very likely comes into play.
So.
Why bring up Socrates in a discussion of King David?

Have you been following the thread at all? Did you not see Image123's post which led in natural progression to my question concerning Socrates, Plato etc?

And the question remains: have the teachings of Socrates (who himself left no writing) been "corrupted"? (Again, it is natural progression arising from posts subsequent to that Image123's post - if you do not want to address it, just leave it be and anyone who is interested can come and take it up - or not)

PA1982:
Well, thus far you've not added anything useful to the subject- it would be great if you did!

A la British parliamentarians, I refer the poster/reader to the answer I gave earlier: "I am happy to leave those who are interested or those who have special or revelation knowledge of the subject to get on with it. I will watch and read happily and contribute if I have any useful thing to add whether directly or for clarification."

Enigma:

,

Right.
Nothing to contribute to the subject.

Even there is no historical evidence of the Red Sea crossing.
All of them are hoaxes
www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/chariot-wheels.htm
@Enigma,
You can't just jump into a thread nd post what you like just because you know how to use a computer. Try and stick to rules and codes of conduct. Some people come on forums like this just to learn and that can be seen when you compare the number of views to the number of posts. Exercise some civility. If you are so bothered about plagiarism then open a thread on it. You came in with your bull crap and spoilt an interesting thread like this. One would have thought you had something meaningful to contribute.

^^^ Call Police! 

@dekung

Because I want to be nice for once, I will give you a chance to apologise. However, this will also test whether you are a real man and an honest person. 

1. My post that you complained about was made five days after the previous post on the thread; five days after the thread was already dead. 

2. The thread was already on page 3, I believe, of the religion section when my post resurrected it and brought it back up.

I have more to say of course but hey, what do you have to say now? 

Do we have any cause to doubt

Why will one be researching to know this? Is this the way to salvation?
When you are inspired by the Holy Spirit, you can then understand the
things of God

@Enigma,
Apologise hahahahahahahh!! hehehhehhehheheh!!
This guy no go kill me. Mo ru gi oyin oooo. hahhhahahah heheheh. Apologise?? heheheh hehehahahha

^^^ QED!

Enigma:

@dekung

Because I want to be nice for once, I will give you a chance to apologise. However, this will also test whether you are a real man and an honest person. 

1. My post that you complained about was made five days after the previous post on the thread; five days after the thread was already dead. 

2. The thread was already on page 3, I believe, of the religion section when my post resurrected it and brought it back up.

I have more to say of course but hey, what do you have to say now? 

@Enigma,
Now that am done laffing I can now respond to your post. You sure have a good sense of humour. Why didnt you say so, , i.e you wanted to revive the post. But does reviving and derailing mean the same thing? If they mean the same thing then you have my apologies, otherwise you can jump in the lagos lagoon. lmfao
@East,
is it wrong to verify the authenticity of 'the things of God'?

dekung:

@Enigma,
Now that am done laffing I can now respond to your post. You sure have a good sense of humour. Why didnt you say so, , i.e you wanted to revive the post. But does reviving and derailing mean the same thing? If they mean the same thing then you have my apologies, otherwise you can jump in the lagos lagoon. lmfao . . . . .

It is a pity you evangelical atheists are all the same

King David and King Solomon did not exist under these nicknames given by
Ezra Nehemiah during the Persian domination of Ancient Egypt.
http://christianjewishbible.com/ezra_truth_about_hebrew_scriptures.htm
"....Colonistswere deported into Palestine under the influence of Ezra and Nehemiah; both members of Cyrus court. Their reward was to have control of a temple state which collected taxes for Persia and served as a buffer state between Persia and Egypt who often were at war...."

Their real names are
Pharoah Thutmose III (From Thut we get Twt and then Dwd and then Dvd)
http://christianjewishbible.com/were_there_hebrew_pharaohs_egypt_2.htm

http://iafricapics.com/18/tuthmosis-iii-egypt/

Pharoah Amenhotep III (A ruler who engaged in massive construction and wealth accumulation during a time of peace)
https://www.nairaland.com/506114/solomon-black-man

In addition,

Moses is an anglicized version of Moshe, an abbreviation for mashiyach which means 'anointed'. In Hebrew era,
anointed referred to a King. The identity of the King being concealed is Pharaoh Akhenaten

http://egyptianchristianity.com/akhenaten_and_monotheism.htm
Several years into Akhenaten's reign, there is clearly a major shift in Egyptian religion under way. By now the pharaoh had moved away the court and capital from Thebes to the new city he names "Akhetaten" and adopted a new title, the name we know him by, Akhen-Aten meaning in Egyptian "he is agreeable (Akhen-) to the sun-disk (-Aten)." To have effectively removed Amun from his name seems like an all but open declaration of warfare against the dominant religious faction in the day, the Amun priesthood based in Thebes. And as if that weren't enough, archaeological evidence shows that around this time Akhenaten began closing down Amun temples across Egypt and even had the name Amun erased from inscriptions. Be not mistaken closing these temples means no money for the Priesthood and that always spells trouble when you take the money from the Pastor of his "church". Later, he went so far as to order the word "gods" removed and changed to "god," wherever it occurred on public inscriptions.