Hiya,
Friday April 18, 2003
Scholars excavate proof of Kings David and Solomon
Really?
I look forward to seeing this "proof".
(I'll ignore the fact that science does NOT do "proof", and consider this to mean "clear and certain evidence".)
JERUSALEM -- The existence of a united Israelite monarchy headed by King David and his son, King Solomon, in the 10th century BCE has been affirmed by laboratory tests on archeological samples from excavations near Beit She'an.
Really?
I look forward to seeing this "affirmed".
The findings, reached through carbon dating by scientists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, have particular significance to the running debate among archeologists about the authenticity of the biblical account of the two kings, and the period and extent of their reign.
Really?
The distinguished Hebrew University archeologist, the late Professor Yigael Yadin, argued more than 40 years ago that a series of monumental structures and particularly the city gates of Hatzor, Megiddo and Gezer as well as certain Megiddo palaces were founded by Solomon, as recorded in the First Book of Kings (9:15).
So,
40 years ago, a faithful believer made some CLAIMS.
No "proof" there.
However, in the 1990s various scholars criticized this view, claiming that the United Monarchy of David and Solomon was not a real historical period of any value in the history of Israel. Indeed, these critics even argued that Yadin's findings were relevant only from the ninth century BCE, the period of the Israelite kings Omri and Ahab.
So,
these claims did not stand up up so scrutiny.
Writing in the April 11 issue of Science Magazine, Hebrew University Professor Amihai Mazar, Ben-Gurion University archeology and ecology expert Hendrik Bruins and Professor Hans Van der Plicht of Groningen describe their findings from excavations at Tel Rehov, located about five kilometers south of Beit She'an in the Beit She'an Valley. The scholars argue that these findings conclusively prove that they found at Tel Rehov signs of an urban society from the 10th century BCE that can be compared with finds from other Israeli sites such as Megiddo, Hatzor and Gezer, which were attributed in the past to the United Monarchy.
Here is the meat :
"argue that these findings conclusively prove that they found at Tel Rehov signs of an urban society from the 10th century BCE"
So,
this "proof" for Solomon merely turns out to be a evidence for
"an urban society from the 10th century BCE".
No evidence for Solomon, no evidence for anything to do with the Bible at all. Just an urban society.
What is the connection with Solomon ?
This : "which were attributed in the past to the United Monarchy".
Yet the article is headed
"Scholars excavate PROOF of Kings David and SOLOMON"
when the reality is :
"Scholars find evidence for 10th century urban society".
The excavations at Tel Rehov have been carried out over the past six years under the direction of Mazar, with the financial support of John Camp of Minneapolis, Minn. The digs revealed several strata from the time of the Book of Judges (12th to 11th centuries BCE) until the Assyrian conquest of Israel in the eighth century BCE.
Once again - all this reveals is occupation in 12th/11th centuries - something we KNOW is true.
But then the article turns to almost to preaching "the digs revealed several strata from the time of the Book of Judges". As if they are EVIDENCE for the time of judges.
This article from the popular press is nothing more than apologetics.
In the article in Science, Mazar, Bruins and Van der Plicht write of radiometric carbon 14 tests that were carried out at Groningen on charred grain and olive pits found in various strata at Tel Rehov. The dates achieved in this research were particularly precise, making it one of the best sets of radiometric dates based on stratigraphic sequence from any site related to the biblical period.
There is NO evidence this site is related to anything Biblical. But to a believer, it MUST be.
The results show that two strata at Tel Rehov are safely dated to the 10th century BCE. One stratum was destroyed in heavy fire. The date of this destruction fits very well with the reign of Shishak, the Egyptian Pharaoh who invaded the Land of Israel around 925 BCE. Shishak's invasion is mentioned both in the Bible (Kings I 14:25) and in his monumental inscription at the temple of Amun at Karnak in Upper Egypt, where Rehov is mentioned among many other places conquered at that time.
It fits.
That's it.
No evidence of any connection, but to a believer, it fits, so it is evidence.
Shishak's military campaign was recorded in stone relief on the southern wall of the Amun temple, listing the names of the places he raided in ancient Israel and the Levant. The name Rehov appears on this list after the term "The Valley," most likely referring to the Beit She'an/Jordan Valley, and before the name Beit She'an. This sequence of place names at Karnak fits the local geography in the region of Tel Rehov very well indeed, according to the Science article.
So the historical records of a historical figure are accurate historically. So what? There is no connection to Solomon here.
Until the summer of 1971 archaeology had failed to conclusively prove the historical basis of the Bible. The walls of Jericho had fallen from grace, the dream of Biblical Archaeologist William Foxwell Albright was still just a theory. That summer Yigael Yadin would complete the first proof of a Biblical Passage by finding the city gate of Gezer which King Solomon built circa 960 BC, and the Bible described in 1 Kings 9:15
Proof?
Solomon's gate?
Really?
Does archeology in general agree with these CLAIMS, EmptyForce?
Have you checked the claims in this popular article with modern mainstream archeology?
Iasion
