King David

Has any proof to the existence of King David or King Solomon been found like coins inscriptions or any other concrete archaeological evidence?

123

Top Answer
User Avatar
Wiki User
Answered
2009-12-22 21:56:05
2009-12-22 21:56:05

The House of David Inscription (also known as the "Tel Dan Inscription") was discovered in 1994 during excavations at the ancient city of Dan. It is considered by many to be the first reference to the "House of David" discovered outside the biblical text.

The Tel Dan Inscription has been dated to about 835 BCE, roughly 150 years after the supposed time of David, and appears to be part of a stele erected by King Hazael of Damascus. The fragment has been pieced together with some gaps filled in, and reads in part: "I killed Jehoram son of Ahab king of Israel, and I killed Ahaziahu son of Jehoram king of the House of David ..." So this is circumstantial evidence that David had once lived, or at least that the Judahites believed he had. The authenticity or interpretation of this limited extra-biblical evidence is still being challenged by some scholars.

There is no extra-biblical evidence to support the historicity of the legendary King Solomon.

001
๐Ÿ™
0
๐Ÿคจ
0
๐Ÿ˜ฎ
0
๐Ÿ˜‚
0

Related Questions


1. archaeological evidence; 2. historiography = documents, history treaties, chronicles; 3. inscriptions in stone.

Archaeological evidence for the Hebrews goes back 3600 years, to 1600 BCE. Linguistic evidence for the existence of the Hebrew language goes back 12,000 years.

From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.From the archaeological evidence, those who remained in the city seemed to be going about their daily lives.

There is an archaeological dig in our own town.This site is of archaeological importance.Archaeological evidence suggests that the Celts never knew what a banana is.

The earliest archaeological evidence of the existence of charriots in Latium (land of the latins) is dated to the last years of the 8th century BC.

There is no evidence against the former existence of dinosaurs. On the contrary, there are numerous fossilized bones from over a thousand dinosaur species proving that they did exist.

Archaeological evidence could often fail because archaeologits could find new evidence that changes their interpertations.

There is a mass of evidence from: * Suvivors * Perpetrators * 'Bystanders' * Post war trials In addition, there is photographic and archaeological evidence. Please see the link.

AnswerThey did not really exist, so they did not have to go anywhere. The stories about them are just myths. There is no archaeological evidence for their existence either before or after the arrival of the Israelites.

Not likely. Coincidences are evidence of coincidence, or if you will, random chaos, which is what the universe is all about. Asking if they are evidence of God's existence is like asking if water is evidence of a fish's existence.

Concrete evidence is specific and fact-based, although general evidence is vague and and possibly an opinion.

The Bible does not say how many people lived in Sodom, but suggests it was a sizable city. We can only rely on the Bible story because there is no historical or archaeological evidence for the existence of Sodom.

Just as there is no evidence for the existence of God, so there is no evidence for the existence of the Holy Ghost. It is a matter of faith, and faith alone.

An appearance is something which is subjective, meaning that it can be interpreted differently by different people. Reality is something for which there is concrete evidence of its existence or that it an event actually happened.

There is no strong evidence that the book exist. However, that MAY be possible. The chances are very slim. So in a nutshell, there is no concrete proof about the existence of the president's book.

They all did according to archaeological evidence

At the moment in time there is no observational evidence of it's existence. Until such time, it will stay as a theory.

a claim without a concrete evidence to support it.

Scholars do not fully agree on the dates and details of the earliest Chinese dynasties, but most accept that the Shang Dynasty is the first one to have left behind written records and solid archaeological evidence of its existence.

According to the archaeological and linguist evidence, Koreans are originated from mainland China.

The historian people study Evidence to Gain more explanation fro the future

There is no evidence to support this claim. There is no evidence of the existence of a being called "the devil". Scientifically, the existence of a devil is an impossibility.

Evidence of frozen water are near the poles

Worldwide, the mountains are the evidence of crustal plates.

Many people have claimed to have seen Bigfoot. Some people have been tracking him for years. No one has brought back concrete evidence though of his existence.


Copyright ยฉ 2020 Multiply Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply.