首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christians who have not heard of King David. What many Christ
Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christians who have not heard of King David. What many Christ
admin
2014-01-07
47
问题
Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christians who have not heard of King David. What many Christians probably do not realize is that, until recently, other than David’s occurrence in the Bible, there has never been actual proof that he ever existed. Over the years this has given fuel to certain groups wishing to view the Bible as a huge trip into the allegorical. However, all of this changed in 1993. Recently, your author learned for the first time what I am going to attempt to tell about here. You might think that given your faith, it doesn’t really matter whether there is proof of David or not. But think for a moment of the implications of our Bible being definitively proven by actual physical evidence. It would be like having your cake, and someone putting icing on it!!!
In 1993(as told in the March/April 1994 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review), Avraham Biran and his team of archaeologists unearthed a piece of stone with fragments of writing on it. In the writings was the words "House of David". It was the first mention of David in ancient inscription outside the Bible. The fragment was found at Tel Dan which lies by the head waters of the Jordan River, near Israel’s northern border. The large piece of basalt was part of what must have been a large monumental inscription. It contains 13 lines, but no single line is complete. The surviving letters are clear, however. Line 9 contains the words "House of David". After the complete translation, it was determined that the fragment was part of a victory stela erected in Dan by an Aramean boasting a military victory over the House of David. Many questions are raised as well as many possibilities upon comparing the fragment with the Biblical history. For instance the victory of the Aramean would conflict with the episode in the Bible. However as BAR points out, there were probably many battles and not all were recorded in the Bible. We do know that Israel must have regained control of Dan. This find would perhaps seem simple and to the point, but that is far from the truth. The find began a debate in earnest.
Immediately following the find, many came forward to state that the stone did not actually mention the "House of David." Along with this claim came the accusation that those believing that it did mention David were "Biblical Maximizers." The arguing was fast and furious. The debate inspired letters to the editors displaying the anger, emotion, and dismay from Christians. How could this new proof be denied? While the verbal debate raged, researchers and scientists quietly built a case on the very evidence the naysayers demanded. Another scholar, Andre’ Lemaire wrote an article in BAR stating that there was another mention of David in an earlier find. It was called the Mesha Stela proclaiming victory for the Moabite king Mesha over the Israelites.
Then in the Impact section of our own The State in December of last year, an article appeared proclaiming that scientists have found that the Bible is built on facts as well as faith. Many fragments have been found in the same area, all mentioning David. Finally, scholars have reached the consensus that David was real, something many of us have never doubted, even before the stelas were found. Although scholars are not ready to admit the Bible is historically true across the board, they are willing to concede that the "Bible has a sound historical core." One thing is certain, these finds don’t only have repercussions in a religious sense, they reach into many domains—political, personal faith, historical. I can’t say in learning about these finds that my faith has grown any stronger, I can say that I have a new appreciation for the Bible as an accurate historical record as well as a basis of faith.
What do scholars think about the existence of David?
选项
A、They have never doubted the authenticity of David.
B、They are looking for more convincing evidence.
C、They are still divided on this issue.
D、They all admit that David existed.
答案
D
解析
最后一段第3句中的reached the consensus表明学者们已经对David的存在达成了共识,他们认同David是真正存在过的,因此,本题应选D。A中的have never doubted不符合原文内容;原文没有提及学者们还会不会继续研究有关David的史实,因此B不正确;C中的divided与原文中的consensus相反。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/5AmMFFFM
0
专业英语四级
相关试题推荐
Thisyear,likelotsofotherpeople,I’mgoingtotrytomakemyownChristmaspresents.It’snotthefirsttimethatI’veprom
Thesimpleactofsurrenderingatelephonenumbertoastoreclerkmaynotseemharmful—somuchsothatmanyconsumersdoitwit
Howparentsreacttodifficulties______astronginfluenceontheirkids.
What’stheseriousproblemthedevelopingcountriesface?
Accordingtothewoman,whatactuallymakesherjobdifficult?
Bosseswoulddowelltobealarmed.Novemberishere,andwithitagoodchancethatthebackofficeisn’tprocessingdata,but
Aninsuranceagentcalledmethismorning.Thisparticularagentwantedtodiscussmyautomobilecoverage,butthenextagentto
Don’tgotothelibrarytoday,I’dratheryou______tomorrowmorning.
WhichofthefollowingstatementsisCORRECTaboutSaturday’smatch?
OneofthemostintriguingstoriesoftheRussianRevolutionconcernstheidentityofAnastasia,theyoungestdaughterofCzarN
随机试题
对新生儿的处理不正确的是
功能性的脊柱侧弯不包括
氧气瓶中的氧气用完后应至少保留()的余压,既安全又节约。
Cotton,likesilk,wasdiscoveredandmade【61】clothbymanbeforethehistoricalperiod【62】.ItsfirstrecordedusewasinIndia
胃黏膜上皮为单层柱状上皮,夹有杯状细胞,分泌特殊黏液样物质,故又称表面黏液细胞。
抗血清制备选择动物的原则不包括
A.水鼓B.气鼓C.肿胀D.血鼓E.痞满腹部膨隆,嗳气或矢气则舒,腹部按之空空然,叩之如鼓是为
产后恶露不行,小腹冷痛。方剂选用
—Doyouregretpayingtendollarsforthatbook?—No,Iwouldgladlyhavepaid______.
新民主主义文化,就是无产阶级领导的人民大众的反帝反封建的文化,即民族的科学的大众的文化。其中,“大众的”内涵是()
最新回复
(
0
)