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
40
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://kaotiyun.com/show/68FK777K
0
专业英语四级
相关试题推荐
ChristinaHudsonisgoingto______inLondon.
Accordingtothenews,whenthefirefighttookplacethemilitantswere
WhichofthefollowingisNOTtrueaccordingtothepassage?
Themanismakingthecallbecausethecellphone
WhenChristopherColumbuslandedonAmerica’sshores,heencounteredcopper-shinnedpeoplewhomhepromptlycalled"Indians".Cu
Parentsoftenfacedthe______betweendoingwhattheyfeltwasgoodforthedevelopmentofthechildandwhattheycouldstand
Whycan’tthefamilystayatthehotelonthefollowingweekend?
TheviewfromMrs.Manstey’swindowwasnotanunusualone,buttoher,atleast,itwasfullofinterestandbeauty.Mrs.Manst
WhichofthefollowingstatementsisCORRECTaboutSaturday’smatch?
Self-PortraitwithStrawHat(1887),aVanGoghself-portraitdoneinParis,isoneofhismostintriguingyetmostneglectedwor
随机试题
PRIMERECRUITMENTEmploymentrecordSurname:LamertonEmail:【L1】________@worldnet.comNationality:【L2】________ReferenceName:
螺杆式压缩机机组管道共振,能够产生()。
下列关于心脏杂音特性的描述,正确的是
下列关于检测HIV抗体的第四代ELISA试剂说法哪项是正确的
1岁半男婴,发热3天,伴咳嗽,流涕,眼结膜充血,流泪,半天前发现患儿耳后、颈部、发缘有稀疏的不规则红色丘斑疹,疹间皮肤正常,体温39.7℃,心肺正常。护士指导家长患儿应隔离至出诊后
所谓过度学习,指在学习过程中,实际学习次数要适当超过刚好能够回忆起来的次数。所以说,过度学习越多,保持效果越好,而且保持的时间也越长。
公安机关维护社会治安秩序和社会稳定的两手是()
虚拟存储器发生页面失效时,需要进行外部地址变换,即实现______的变换。
下列说法中错误的一项是______。
窗体中的信息不包括()。
最新回复
(
0
)