Replies

Citation please

You will just have to do your own research, FTD. This is a neat trick in order to have someone else do the work for you. But, I will give you some leads. For the last 150 years of active (indeed, intense even) archaeological digging, there is no evidence of any Davidian "empire." Rather it was more like two dozen villages, with few thousand inhabitants (See Finkelstein & Silberman, The Bible Unearthed: p132, 142-143 and Marcus, The View from Nebo: p125 )

Charles Warren's (1867) (see Keller, The Bible as History: p190-191), which claimed to have discovered the water shaft purportedly used by David to attack his enemies has been debunked when it was established that it is a natural fissure that contains nothing even close to Davidian times, but rather much older Canaanite and much younger Israeli artifacts. (see Sturgis, It Ain?t Necessarily So: p143-144)

In fact, there is not a single mention of any of the surrounding settlemts and kingdoms of any powerful king by the name of David, or his "vast empire." The Tel Dan Stela fragments (late 800's BC) discovered in 1993, seem to suggest (without universal agreement, however, because of the poor match of the two fragments suggesting they were not of the same origin) the existence of Davidian offspring.

Truly, so much power and so little written about him. History has no problems recording powerful leaders great empires and significant events with utmost pedantry, except when it comes to Israeli claims.

Extensive redactions and machinations about David can be traced to the 7th c. BC Israeli king Josiah. Davidian myth grew proportionally as more time elapsed after his death. Too bad, archeology doesn't seem to be able to find anything even close to the myths we find in the Bible about David, mainly contained in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles.

All these myths, beginning with Genesis (which clashes with anthropological evidence) and Exodus (which lacks any archaeological evidence of that ever happening), are part of oral tales that were passed on from one generation to another, with obvious variations, exaggerations and alterations. As such they are man-made received text that was carefully and deliberately doctored to create a providential message.

There is a strong probability that Jerusalem did not even exist during the time of David (11th c. BC) and that it became a more prominent place some 300 years later. (see Finkelstein & Silberman, The Bible Unearthed: p132)

The first and extensive redactions and machinations about David can be traced to the 7th c. BC Israeli king Josiah. Davidian myth grew proportionally as more time elapsed after his death. Too bad, archeology doesn't seem to be able to find anything even close to the myths we find in the Bible about David, mainly contained in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles.

I wish it were otherwise, but even the Bible uses "miracles" as "proof" to make believers; taking someone's word just doesn't seem to cut it even in the Bible. An ap priori acceptance of something that has so much evidence of human tampering is only fit for the gullible who confuse their wishes as reality, and man-made traditions with divinity.

Citation please You will just have to do your own research, FTD. This is a neat trick in order to have someone else do the work for you. But, I will give you some leads. For the last 150 years of active (indeed, intense even) archaeological digging, there is no evidence of any Davidian "empire." Rather it was more like two dozen villages, with few thousand inhabitants (See Finkelstein & Silberman, The Bible Unearthed: p132, 142-143 and Marcus, The View from Nebo: p125 )

No it is nice trick to cite something without any backing of it with evidence.

I gave you a citation from a Jewish source that stated that David had a great empire.

Honestly demands that one back up what one asserts.

Charles Warren's (1867) (see Keller, The Bible as History: p190-191), which claimed to have discovered the water shaft purportedly used by David to attack his enemies has been debunked when it was established that it is a natural fissure that contains nothing even close to Davidian times, but rather much older Canaanite and much younger Israeli artifacts. (see Sturgis, It Ain?t Necessarily So: p143-144) In fact, there is not a single mention of any of the surrounding settlemts and kingdoms of any powerful king by the name of David, or his "vast empire." The Tel Dan Stela fragments (late 800's BC) discovered in 1993, seem to suggest (without universal agreement, however, because of the poor match of the two fragments suggesting they were not of the same origin) the existence of Davidian offspring. Truly, so much power and so little written about him. History has no problems recording powerful leaders great empires and significant events with utmost pedantry, except when it comes to Israeli claims. Extensive redactions and machinations about David can be traced to the 7th c. BC Israeli king Josiah. Davidian myth grew proportionally as more time elapsed after his death. Too bad, archeology doesn't seem to be able to find anything even close to the myths we find in the Bible about David, mainly contained in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles. All these myths, beginning with Genesis (which clashes with anthropological evidence) and Exodus (which lacks any archaeological evidence of that ever happening), are part of oral tales that were passed on from one generation to another, with obvious variations, exaggerations and alterations. As such they are man-made received text that was carefully and deliberately doctored to create a providential message. There is a strong probability that Jerusalem did not even exist during the time of David (11th c. BC) and that it became a more prominent place some 300 years later. (see Finkelstein & Silberman, The Bible Unearthed: p132) The first and extensive redactions and machinations about David can be traced to the 7th c. BC Israeli king Josiah. Davidian myth grew proportionally as more time elapsed after his death. Too bad, archeology doesn't seem to be able to find anything even close to the myths we find in the Bible about David, mainly contained in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles. I wish it were otherwise, but even the Bible uses "miracles" as "proof" to make believers; taking someone's word just doesn't seem to cut it even in the Bible. An ap priori acceptance of something that has so much evidence of human tampering is only fit for the gullible who confuse their wishes as reality, and man-made traditions with divinity.

And to bad that your 'history' is as flawed as your theology.

In fact, the history shows otherwise, that David had a great Kingdom, as well as Solomon.

The Dimensions and Compositions of the State. David’s empire, though by our standards not large, was by ancient ones of quite respectable size.... His domain lacked but little of being the equivalent of the Egyptian holdings in Asia in the heyday of the Empire. It included all of Palestine, east and west, from the desert to the sea, with its southern frontier deep in the Sinai desert along a line from the Gulf of Aqabah to the Mediterranean at the river of Egypt (Wadi el’Arish). The Canannites of Palestine had been incorporated in the state, the Philistines restricted to a narrow strip along the southern coastal plain, while Moab, Edom, and Ammon, under one arrangement or another, yielded tribute. All of southern and central Syria was embraced in the empire, apparently under provinical administration. David’s frontier ran northward with that of Tyre along the back of Lebanon range to a point near Kadesh on the Orantes, where it betn eastward with the frontier of Hamath (which itself may have been a tributary to David) into the desert. David probably exercised a loose control, as Hadadezer had, over Aramean tribes to the northeast as far as Euphrates valley, certainly with Zobah disposed of, no power was there to stop him. ( A History of Israel, 3rd edit. John Bright, Thoroughly Updated and Revised Featuring new information from recent archaeological and historical findings including the Ebla tablets, Westminster Press, 1972, 1981, pg.204-5.

I wish it were otherwise, but even the Bible uses "miracles" as "proof" to make believers; taking someone's word just doesn't seem to cut it even in the Bible. An ap priori acceptance of something that has so much evidence of human tampering is only fit for the gullible who confuse their wishes as reality, and man-made traditions with divinity.

And rejecting God's truth is the mark of the scorner, a scorner seeketh wisdom and findeth it not (Pr.14:6).

As for mixing man-made traditions with the divine, that is precisely what your religion does.