King Hezekiah's Seal Discovered in Jerusalem.

a reply to: Marduk

Soooooo great great great grandchildren of his who left Royal Seals and buildings and cities and BOOKS IN THE BIBLE and whatnot laying around everywhere is a lack of proof to you

a reply to: dashen

Ok read the paper I posted( sorry on my phone but search it ) and get back to me.

originally posted by: zardust
a reply to: dashen

Ok read the paper I posted( sorry on my phone but search it ) and get back to me.

Dashen is correct. Although the Egyptians did occasionally conquer the area, the people who lived there kept their religion (the only ones in the area who worshiped Isis were the Egyptian troops garrisoned in the area.) David conquered an existing city, and Wikipedia explains the origin of the name

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Marduk

Soooooo great great great grandchildren of his who left Royal Seals and buildings and cities and BOOKS IN THE BIBLE and whatnot laying around everywhere is a lack of proof to you

I wasn't denying his existence, just that at the time he was supposed to have lived, none of the archaeology supports the biblical claims, Judah at the time of David was a small tribal kingdom,
but for you to claim
1 Every archaeological discovery in Israel
and
2 BOOKS IN THE BIBLE
support his existence, is laughable, you sound like a fundamentalist, claiming that the bible supports itself as if its an academic history book
It isn't and it doesn't


Wiki has a nice summation of the supporting evidence, its a bit brief
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Marduk

Judah, was a small tribal kingdom consisting of dozens of cities at the time of david, there were eleven additional hebrew tribes spread out across the land since the conquest of Joshua.
Further proof is the video in the op of assyrian pillars celebrating victories.against judean cities.
You dont carve out a huge pillar after defeating a wee tribe.

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Marduk

Judah, was a small tribal kingdom consisting of dozens of cities at the time of david, there were eleven additional hebrew tribes spread out across the land since the conquest of Joshua.
Further proof is the video in the op of assyrian pillars celebrating victories.against judean cities.
You dont carve out a huge pillar after defeating a wee tribe.

None of which mentions David at all
your qualification for what constitutes proof is severely lacking, are you perhaps religious
lol

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Marduk

Soooooo great great great grandchildren of his who left Royal Seals and buildings and cities and BOOKS IN THE BIBLE and whatnot laying around everywhere is a lack of proof to you

I wasn't denying his existence, just that at the time he was supposed to have lived, none of the archaeology supports the biblical claims, Judah at the time of David was a small tribal kingdom,
but for you to claim
1 Every archaeological discovery in Israel
and
2 BOOKS IN THE BIBLE
support his existence, is laughable, you sound like a fundamentalist, claiming that the bible supports itself as if its an academic history book
It isn't and it doesn't

Wiki has a nice summation of the supporting evidence, its a bit brief
en.wikipedia.org...

This is a perilous claim though. just ask all the bible critics that said this or that city did not exist or that there was no record of the jewish captivity or this or that scripture was written centuries after its claimed time period such as the isaiah scroll or the gospels. usually such attacks dissolve under subsequent discoveries. there was a well known bible criticism school ( Horscht Kritik ) that put their money on such arguments. they have been thoroughly proven wrong over time.

E.G: " there is no evidence Jericho ever existed; therefore it didn't." Until Jericho's ruins were found. complete with an exploded wall.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

This is a perilous claim though. just ask all the bible critics that said this or that city did not exist or that there was no record of the jewish captivity or this or that scripture was written centuries after its claimed time period such as the isaiah scroll or the gospels. usually such attacks dissolve under subsequent discoveries. there was a well known bible criticism school ( Horscht Kritik ) that put their money on such arguments. they have been thoroughly proven wrong over time.

I haven't denied anythings existence, so I have no idea what's perilous about making a claim based on the archaeological evidence.

Part of the Gospel includes two genological lists (for both father and Mother; IIRC) for Jesus though the one for his earthly father is not part of his only partially germane. both trace every name of every generation of his forefathers all the way to Adam. these are included as proof that geneologically he has a valid pedigree for being the prophesied messiah. what is relevant here is that the geneology provided the names for every generation between Christ and David in the Kingly lineage. he also is of the priestly line which is also important for messianic provenance according to prophesy. Both Priest and king like unto melchezadic.

Implicit in this doubt bout David:

If the claims of linage through David is not true because David did not exist then Christ was not messiah and the totality of Christianity is invalid. and so is Judaism and even Islam.

Frankly though most if not all of that genealogy is verifiable including people who claimed direct descent from David over the timeline in question. there may not be direct archeaological proof but archaeology is not the only relevant science. Anthropology also counts for example. Davids existence can be reasonably inferred from what happened afterward. and the more archeological evidence that accrues even if it is about an precedent and antecedant person such as king Saul for example.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
If the claims of linage through David is not true because David did not exist then Christ was not messiah and the totality of Christianity is invalid. and so is Judaism and even Islam.

I don't know where you got the idea that Christ would be invalidated if it turns out that he was not a blood relative of David

He was not a blood relative of David, Joseph wasn't his father
How did you miss that


What about the other part of the prophecy, that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem
that's well known to have been made up

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
If the claims of linage through David is not true because David did not exist then Christ was not messiah and the totality of Christianity is invalid. and so is Judaism and even Islam.

I don't know where you got the idea that Christ would be invalidated if it turns out that he was not a blood relative of David

He was not a blood relative of David, Joseph wasn't his father
How did you miss that

What about the other part of the prophecy, that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem
that's well known to have been made up

I did not miss that at all. in fact i mentioned it myself. but for judaic familial things both geneologies are still valid. But if The geneology of Christ is untrue then he cannot fulfill the prophesy because the prophesies say he will be a descendant of David among others. therefore he would be a false messiah. and everything that follows david in the bible would be a lie. this includes the books of the prophets. so judaisn would be a false religion, Christianity would be a false religion and Since Islam also claims abrahamic roots and pays nominal respect to the prophets and jesus also it would be a false religion too.

and the bethlehem thing is not so straightforward as you seem to presume. i seem to recall a few lectures on this vaguely. not well enough for me to produce an apolgia on it but it's there.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701


I did not miss that at all. in fact i mentioned it myself. but for judaic familial things both geneologies are still valid. But if The geneology of Christ is untrue then he cannot fulfill the prophesy because the prophesies say he will be a descendant of David among others. therefore he would be a false messiah. and everything that follows david in the bible would be a lie. this includes the books of the prophets. so judaisn would be a false religion, Christianity would be a false religion and Since Islam also claims abrahamic roots and pays nominal respect to the prophets and jesus also it would be a false religion too.

So his daddy wasn't YHWH then ??, there goes the son of God claim lol
Right and the problem with all religions being false is what exactly ?

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
and the bethlehem thing is not so straightforward as you seem to presume. i seem to recall a few lectures on this vaguely. not well enough for me to produce an apolgia on it but it's there.

Its very straight forwad
There was no Roman census in the year of the birth,
So that didn't happen
So joseph didn't need to go register and even if there was, only the head of the household was required,
secondly, Herod is supposed to have massacred children because he feared the coming Christ
Herod died 4 years earlier

Its almost as if someone made it all up years later and wasn't too sure of the facts,
its also well known that at the time, Messianic claimants were ten a penny, Simon bar Kokhba for instance fulfilled far more of the claims. Yet he doesn't have a religion built around him, because most likely he didn't pretend to have died on the cross after three hours when it usually takes three days

did i mention that the way judaism recons geneology is not the way we do it? the inclusion of both maternal and "paternal" geneologies is unusual for the traditions of judaism. There is one other instance of this deviation from judaic ways of reconning geneology occurring in the bible. Adam appears to get this treatment in Genesis but in reality one of them is a geneology of Cain.

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: stormbringer1701


I did not miss that at all. in fact i mentioned it myself. but for judaic familial things both geneologies are still valid. But if The geneology of Christ is untrue then he cannot fulfill the prophesy because the prophesies say he will be a descendant of David among others. therefore he would be a false messiah. and everything that follows david in the bible would be a lie. this includes the books of the prophets. so judaisn would be a false religion, Christianity would be a false religion and Since Islam also claims abrahamic roots and pays nominal respect to the prophets and jesus also it would be a false religion too.

So his daddy wasn't YHWH then ??, there goes the son of God claim lol
Right and the problem with all religions being false is what exactly ?

Even though Joseph was not related genetically his geneology is still a valid part of Christ's lineage in the Judaic way of counting family. Beyond that the other geneology (of his mother) also goes through david if i recall correctly.

to explain at lengths i am not prepared to go to at this time here is a cite (one of many available) on this issue: carm.org...

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
to explain at lengths i am not prepared to go to at this time here is a cite (one of many available) on this issue: carm.org...

Yeah, because I am completely unaware of the problems with biblical inconsistency

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
did i mention that the way judaism recons geneology is not the way we do it? the inclusion of both maternal and "paternal" geneologies is unusual for the traditions of judaism. There is one other instance of this deviation from judaic ways of reconning geneology occurring in the bible. Adam appears to get this treatment in Genesis but in reality one of them is a geneology of Cain.

This is interesting though, when Adam and Eve had two kids and those kids went out and got married
Who did they marry ?

don't get me started on the census thing... don't you know that the change of calendars the Romans did resulted in a three year error for the events surrounding Christ. he was born 3 years B.C (if i remember it right) as silly as that may sound. So you have to look for historic and astronomical events/records from that date. also he wan't born in december but he was conceived then. he was born 9 months later. That has to be taken into account when examining the gospel account of his birth (seasons location of shepherds and such.)