Archaeologists claim to have found King David's palace in Israel

A team of Israeli archaeologists believes it has discovered the ruins of a palace belonging to the biblical King David, but other Israeli experts dispute the claim. Archaeologists from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel's Antiquities Authority said their find, a large fortified complex west of Jerusalem at a site called Khirbet Qeiyafa , is the first palace of the biblical king ever to be discovered.

Archaeologists claim to have found King David's palace in Israel

Well there appears to still be questions of the validity of the find if it is or not, guess time will tell.

Interesting for a book that many consider allegorical often leads to real locations and people being found to have existed.

the travelling who ????? the brits are the real tribe not a bunch of kzars a pict i .

and the band played believe it it if you like

I have not heard about this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. S&F

Interesting for a book that many consider allegorical often leads to real locations and people being found to have existed.

May I suggest Romans 1:18-25
Quad

Originally posted by benrl


Interesting for a book that many consider allegorical often leads to real locations and people being found to have existed.

Because it was written in the region and during those times.They had oral history and written records.

If one were to read 'Gone with the Wind' 2,000 years from now it's set in the American Civil War in a city that existed, real historic people are also mention but Tara and the main characters are all made up...

Interesting report of finding Kind David's palace but as the news reports notes the evidence is weak - Herod palace was a good ruin too

They seem to think it's King David's palace because of the absence of pig remains. No kidding. That's what it says in the article.

Maybe these fellows aren't as scientific as they think they are. By the way, exactly which Biblical stories are supported by archaeological evidence?

Originally posted by Astyanax
They seem to think it's King David's palace because of the absence of pig remains. No kidding. That's what it says in the article.

Maybe these fellows aren't as scientific as they think they are. By the way, exactly which Biblical stories are supported by archaeological evidence?

Off the top of my head I would say Qumran finds and the finding of the tomb of Herod

I like how people desperately try to come up with some kind of reasoning as to why it "just can't be" when something which further confirms the Bible is found. It's almost comical the lengths some will go just to avoid admitting that the Word of God is correct.

Very interesting. Another one to add to the vast list of biblical archaeological finds!

Originally posted by jeramie
I like how people desperately try to come up with some kind of reasoning as to why it "just can't be" when something which further confirms the Bible is found. It's almost comical the lengths some will go just to avoid admitting that the Word of God is correct.

Very interesting. Another one to add to the vast list of biblical archaeological finds!

Finding archeology that supports a historical narrative doesn't mean it supports a supernatural narrative also. The dude who wrote the Bible books live at that time or had oral traditions/texts to help them recall, it would be odd if they didn't known what was going on in the real world around them.

Example. I can write about todays world where I live in the Pacific Northwest, I can mention Seatle, the Governor of Oregon, etc, this is historic information but does that add credence to my claim that I worship a large purple sea slug named Stanley who created the world and has really, really bad communication skills, changes his mind a lot and seems generally confused?

No it does not, lol

A snippet from the article:

Biblical archaeology itself is contentious. Israelis often use archaeological findings to back up their historic claims to sites that are also claimed by the Palestinians, like the Old City of Jerusalem.

First of all, what is generally referred to as 'Biblical Archaeology' is largely a 'Christian' thing. American archaeologists often seem more eager to confirm the Bible than Israeli archaeologists.

Second, after working more than 20 years with Israeli archaeologists from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, I have NEVER come across any attempt of 'scewing' the work in favor of a biblical confirmation (which does not exclude the possibility that it could have happened in islotated cases). The archaeologists I've worked with dig through and document the Canaanite/Arab/Islamic layers with as much meticulous rigour as the Judean/Israeli layers, which is the way it should be,

Third, if we're talking 'contentious archaeology' in Jerusalem, why not talk about the biggest foul of them all. The Waqf, or Islamic authority of the Temple Mount, used bulldozers to clear out one of the most politically and religiously sensitive archaeological sites in the world; the Temple Mount.

www.haaretz.com...

These guys should be put to trial together with the guys that levelled the Mayan pyramid for roadfill, and the Talibans that blew up the Giant Buddhas of Bamiyan.

reply to post by benrl


King David's or not it's still a great find.
The entire area is built upon the ruins of what came before. Who knows? Maybe they did or maybe they didn't?

Shrugs, meh..

From the Biblical archeology site,

www.biblicalarchaeology.org...

The other structure, a pillared storeroom, features hundreds of storage jars “stamped with an official seal as was customary in the Kingdom of Judah for centuries,” according to the IAA press release.

Khirbet Qeiyafa has produced numerous exciting and controversial finds (see links below) that have kept the Biblical archaeology world buzzing. Overlooking the Valley of Elah in the Judean foothills, the fortified Judahite site of Qeiyafa, on the border with the Philistines, has produced persuasive evidence to support the kingship of David at the beginning of Iron Age II, when the Bible says he ruled. The unique presence of two gates at the site has led Garfinkel to identify it as Biblical Sha’arayim, which means “two gates” in Hebrew.

www.haaretz.com...

Royal storerooms were also revealed in the joint archaeological excavation of the Hebrew University and the Israel Antiquities Authority at Khirbet Qeiyafa

www.antiquities.org.il...

qeiyafa.huji.ac.il...

members.bib-arch.org...

Evidence of Cultic Activity in Judah Discovered at Khirbet Qeiyafa

www.biblicalarchaeology.org... red-at-khirbet-qeiyafa/

fascinating finds from Khirbet Qeiyafa are shedding light on the crucial historical period of King David. Announced today at a press conference in Jerusalem, Garfinkel shared with the public for the first time several cultic items that were recently excavated from three “shrine rooms” at the site, including two portable shrine models, two basalt altars, two pottery libation vessels and five standing stones. According to Garfinkel and his codirector, Saar Ganor of the Israel Antiquities Authority, these finds offer the first clear archaeological evidence of cultic activity in Judah during the time of King David. The shrine models also show the existence of sophisticated royal architecture styles during that period and may shed light on design elements of Solomon’s Temple as described in the Bible.

Slide show also

The cult objects include five standing stones (Massebot), two basalt altars, two pottery libation vessels and two portable shrines. No human or animal figurines were found, suggesting the people of Khirbet Qeiyafa observed the biblical ban on graven images.

Two portable shrines (or “shrine models”) were found, one made of pottery (ca. 20 cm high) and the other of stone (35 cm high). These are boxes in the shape of temples, and could be closed by doors.

The clay shrine is decorated with an elaborate façade, including two guardian lions, two pillars, a main door, beams of the roof, folded textile and three birds standing on the roof. Two of these elements are described in Solomon’s Temple: the two pillars (Yachin and Boaz) and the textile (Parochet).

The stone shrine is made of soft limestone and painted red. Its façade is decorated by two elements. The first are seven groups of roof-beams, three planks in each. This architectural element, the “triglyph,” is known in Greek classical temples, like the Parthenon in Athens. Its appearance at Khirbet Qeiyafa is the earliest known example carved in stone, a landmark in world architecture.

The second decorative element is the recessed door. This type of doors or windows is known in the architecture of temples, palaces and royal graves in the ancient Near East. This was a typical symbol of divinity and royalty at the time.

reply to post by Astyanax


For what it matters I believe Ron Wyatt though now it is a money spinner he never made money from it as far as I know.
www.arkdiscovery.com...
Make up your own mind but go through the site with a fine toothcomb.

reply to post by Astyanax

By the way, exactly which Biblical stories are supported by archaeological evidence?

The construction of Hezekiah tunnel.

The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the faithful transmission of the Masoretic Text.

The Tel Dan Stele, according to some, points to the existance of David or at the very least a royal house in Israel.

Shisak's invasion of Israel during the reign of Rehoboam.

Trade between Israel and Sheba.

The reigns of Omri, Ahab, Uzziah, Hezekiah, Ahaz, Jeroboam II, and Jehoiachin.

The existence of a people called the Hittites.

The existence of Roman governors and proconsuls.

reply to post by benrl

silly wabbit King David is a myth.

reply to post by Heliocentric


What was your area of speciality/dissertation Heliocentric?

Originally posted by geobro
the travelling who ????? the brits are the real tribe not a bunch of kzars a pict i .

and the band played believe it it if you like

Yes the brits are but it goes back to celts and germanic pagan druids.

Don't forget, that the white pagan celts lived around that area of judea. Wearing foil death masks.

reply to post by octotom

That's nice. I imagine most of these are fairly uncontroversial, or would be if you wrote 'Palestine' in place of 'Israel' there, and 'the existence of the people referred to in the Bible as the Hittites', since I believe they were really called something different.

I was thinking more in terms of the confirmation of supernatural events mentioned in the Bible, though.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by jeramie
I like how people desperately try to come up with some kind of reasoning as to why it "just can't be" when something which further confirms the Bible is found. It's almost comical the lengths some will go just to avoid admitting that the Word of God is correct.

Very interesting. Another one to add to the vast list of biblical archaeological finds!

Finding archeology that supports a historical narrative doesn't mean it supports a supernatural narrative also. The dude who wrote the Bible books live at that time or had oral traditions/texts to help them recall, it would be odd if they didn't known what was going on in the real world around them.

Example. I can write about todays world where I live in the Pacific Northwest, I can mention Seatle, the Governor of Oregon, etc, this is historic information but does that add credence to my claim that I worship a large purple sea slug named Stanley who created the world and has really, really bad communication skills, changes his mind a lot and seems generally confused?

No it does not, lol

edit on 23/7/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

You're right.

This is probably why he finds it funny.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by octotom

 

That's nice. I imagine most of these are fairly uncontroversial, or would be if you wrote 'Palestine' in place of 'Israel' there, and 'the existence of the people referred to in the Bible as the Hittites', since I believe they were really called something different.

I was thinking more in terms of the confirmation of supernatural events mentioned in the Bible, though.

edit on 23/7/13 by Astyanax because: one need not overstate the obvious.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your post.
Why would he write "Palestine" instead of "Israel"?
There has never actually been a country, state or place named Palestine.
Quad