I have written before about the scepticism that surrounded the idea of the Israelites’ escape from Egypt in the Exodus. The claim critics made that there was no evidence for the Exodus, that it was a Jewish myth. I debunked that with the help of David Rohl’s research found in his book A Test of Time and that of Leonnart Möeller’s in The Exodus Case. Critics have also claimed that David is “as historical as King Arthur”. In other words we don’t know much about King Arthur, was King Arthur real or were the stories a series of myths and legends? So a lot of sceptics believe that David and some of the other heroes of the Bible are exactly like King Arthur.
Philip Davies, a so called Bible scholar, says that “There is no literary criteria for believing David to be more historical than Joshua …, Joshua than Abraham,…Abraham than Adam. There is no non-literary way of making this judgement either, since none of these characters has left a trace outside the biblical text.” Well that is an untrue statement given what David Rohl, a British Egyptologist has documented related to Joseph.
In 1993 Gila Cook, an archaeologist on Avraham Biran’s dig at Tel Dan, was digging around the area of Palestine close to the ancient city of Dan and found a certain flat rock with some Aramaic writing on it. She called over Avraham, the team leader, while finding it hard to hide her excitement and said “Oh my God, we have an inscription”. Up until this point, nobody had found any reference whatsoever to David. Absolutely nothing referring to David. The Kingdom of David and the kingdom of Solomon feature heavily at the peak of Israel’s kingdom and it’s extension. Why wouldn’t something be found? But nothing had been found. Gila Cook had found the first reference ever to David that doesn’t come from the Bible – it’s extra biblical and comes from one of the neighbouring kingdoms around Israel and reads:
“…my father went up… and my father died, he went to – there is a little bit in brackets [his fate.. Is is not in the text but it continues on …rael formerly in my father’s land…I fought against Israel and Hadad went in front of me. Hadad went in front of me .. my king. And I slew them [X number of footmen, Y number of chariots] and two thousand horsemen…The King of Israel. And I slew” . . . then a little section that is not clear” . . . and then we have got, we have to supply the word [.. the kin-]g of the house of David.”
There is the first reference that anybody had ever been found with a reference to David as a king, substantiating that in fact David was the king of Israel, and that indeed there was such a person called David. There are those who have doubted even those basic facts.
But typically when that was found in 1993, critics then had to find a way to refute it. One skeptic said that it probably doesn’t refer to David at all, it probably refers to “the house of Dod”. Well there was no such person. There is no indication in anything in the innings of the fAncient Near East with a reference to anybody or any god called Dod but this “expert” came up with something that helps to explain why this significant find related to David is worthless. A few others have suggested that it was planted there at Dan.
Anything to not have to believe the Bible. I am about to begin a new series in the Nuggets related to recent finds which shed light on biblical truth. Many times in the past I have embarked on a series within the Nuggets. The series on David Rohl’s material was one related to the evidence for the Exodus. The more recent series I did on the Signs of Mazzaroth (Constellations) and the heavens God created. Well now I am commencing a new series.
Recent archaeological finds which shed light on the truth of the Bible.