FINDING BOOSTS PROOF OF GOLIATH

[O2BESOHUGE]

TweetJERUSALEM - Archaeologists digging at the purported biblical home of Goliath have unearthed a shard of pottery bearing an inscription of the Philistine's name, a find they claimed lends historical credence to the Bible's tale of David's battle with the giant.

ADVERTISEMENT



While the discovery is not definitive evidence of Goliath's existence, it does support the Bible's depiction of life at the time the battle was supposed to have occurred, said Dr. Aren Maeir, a professor at Bar-Ilan University and director of the excavation.

"What this means is that at the time there were people there named Goliath," he said. "It shows us that David and Goliath's story reflects the cultural reality of the time." In the story, David slew Goliath with a slingshot.

Some scholars assert the story of David slaying the giant Goliath is a myth written down hundreds of years later. Maeir said finding the scraps lends historical credence to the biblical story.

The shard dates back to around 950 B.C., within 70 years of when biblical chronology asserts David squared off against Goliath, making it the oldest Philistine inscription ever found, the archaeologists said.

Scientists made the discovery at Tel es-Safi, a dig site in southern Israel thought to be to be the location of the Philistine city of Gath.

[T-Man007]

TweetThat's just got to piss those guys off. You know, the ones who say the Bible is nothing more than stories and then they find pottery in the place where the Philistines lived with the name Goliath inscribed on it. Hmmm....coincidence, I don't think so. Many scientists are now saying that digging for 'evidence' will more than likely disprove evolution in the long run because it has too many theories and not enough facts, and here is just one example.

[Skarhead]

Tweetmaybe evolution will get disproved but creationism will never in a million years get proved though

[T-Man007]

Tweet

maybe evolution will get disproved but creationism will never in a million years get proved though

Ummm....if there is no evolution, the only reamainding choice IS creation. LOL

[Skarhead]

TweetLOL,... good point, but iwas more or less referring to of the theory we have now on evolution

[O2BESOHUGE]

TweetTHEYVE FOUND WOOD AT THE TOP AF MT. ARARAT WHERE THE ARCH WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE LANDED AFTER THE FLOOD

WHAT ABOUT THAT?

ALSO IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN REAL? WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK?

O2

[Skarhead]

Tweetstill never willl believe there is god or spirits or anything like that.

[Testify]

TweetThe shroud is a fake. But why is it so hard to believe that there was a giant philistine named Goliath? That doesn't seem too much out of the ordinary.

[T-Man007]

Tweet

THEYVE FOUND WOOD AT THE TOP AF MT. ARARAT WHERE THE ARCH WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE LANDED AFTER THE FLOOD

WHAT ABOUT THAT?

ALSO IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN REAL? WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK?

O2

I got to meet one of the 'scientists' who worked on the Shroud. Now, I will go on record for saying this scientist was not a believer before he worked on it. He told me that some scientists discredit it's authenticity because of its carbon dating. However, he told be the Shroud was in a fire and and due to the Carbon released in the fire it has made carbon dating impossble to be accurate. He also went on to say he was there as one of the anti-religous scientists to make sure the evidence wasn't tampered with and so on. After many many test they ruled out the image on the Shroud as being dirt, oil, etc... As a matter of fact, the ONLY explanation they could conclude as to what left the image on the Shroud was the equivilant to that of energy. If you can imagine a transformation of a solid into something else the change would have to result from a molecular transformation. He said it was if the body turned into pure energy as it passed through the Shroud. There was absolutely no signs of tearing or cutting. If you know anything about how this was done you would have had to cut it off in most cases to get the body out, but the Shroud was completely intact. He said he was absolutley baffled. He said he, and the other two anti-religious scientists, relized they were wrong and this very Shroud proved that the man inside transformed from a solid human being to pure energy and he said he there was NO other scientific explanation for it. Not one scientist who has worked on the Shroud can prove any other explanation for the image. He also said, the ONLY thing in question what so ever is the carbon dating which ALL acientists will tell you is inaccurate if the item has been explosed to fire. He know believes.

As far as the Arch, I heard something about it but then nothing more. So, who know about that one.

[mick-G]

TweetI believe the Shroud was already proven to be fake, as it was produced by most likely a painter of that period, as many used the coloring made during that time. As far as this Goliath name on pottery, well it was a very common name in that area and could prob be found on many items during that period also. I am not trying to discount that it is factual, but you have to understand much of what was handed down thru generations and thru the centuries have been taken out of context and exaggerated. Many believe that Jesus was just a profit/zelot, like many during that time period as well, and like many who were prosecuted, crucifixion was the common practice for conviction of a crime in those days. As time pasted the story became more and more exagerated and was enveloped into Christianity. Even the Bible has been stolen, replaced,taken down form past generations, and revised. Who knows what the real true meanings really are. Ppl are just going by what they were brought up to believe, and as time passes, changes will be made to what is already believed and future generations will surmise their own conclusions drawing up different beliefs based on those changes.

[T-Man007]

Tweet

I believe the Shroud was already proven to be fake, as it was produced by most likely a painter of that period, as many used the coloring made during that time. As far as this Goliath name on pottery, well it was a very common name in that area and could prob be found on many items during that period also. I am not trying to discount that it is factual, but you have to understand much of what was handed down thru generations and thru the centuries have been taken out of context and exaggerated. Many believe that Jesus was just a profit/zelot, like many during that time period as well, and like many who were prosecuted, crucifixion was the common practice for conviction of a crime in those days. As time pasted the story became more and more exagerated and was enveloped into Christianity. Even the Bible has been stolen, replace,taken down form past generations, and revised. Who knows what the real true meanings really are. Ppl are just going by what they were brought up to believe, and as time passes, changes will be made to what is already believed and future generations will surmise their own conclusions drawing up different beliefs based on those changes.

Actually, they disproved any evidence of paint or anything like that on the Shroud. Read my post ^^. Unless that guy is full os totaly crap, then what else convinced him to change from atheist to religious. He says it was his work on the Shroud. Maybe he's full of it, I don't know.

As far as the Bible goes, the original writings in Greek and Acient Hebrew were used to write the English version. The only changes given to the Bible are that of a more common version of the English language. The only form of Chrisianity that has changed the Bible is Catholic, they have added books to their Bible since the dead sea scrolls. I grew up Catholic and when I changed to non-denominational I remember arguing with someone that it was the same Bible and then they showed me the differences. So, in that since, yes man has altered the original Bible. That's another reason I switched. Revelations says 'Let no man add to or take away from the work of God". Just my opinion.

[mick-G]

TweetTo be honest i can't really remember, as far as the Shroud. It was on Discovery or A&E and had something to do with either the coloring used or the actual material used for the image and they proved it to be that of most likely a painter of that period. I have also read many of what was taken from the Hebrew and Greek writings were revised and reissued, and even the originals are not all intact. Then many of the revised issues in particular King James version has been changed and reworded. You will always get ppl, if they believe in Christianity to bring in pieces of historical fact and implement them into the theory, as well as scientists and archeologists that will disprove it.

[T-Man007]

TweetSo true bro, so true!