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
(1)Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christians who have not heard of King David. What many Chr
(1)Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christians who have not heard of King David. What many Chr
admin
2016-12-06
32
问题
(1)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!!!
(2)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.
(3)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.
(4)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.
According to the second paragraph, the first mention of David outside the Bible was found ______.
选项
A、on a monument
B、outside David’s house
C、about David’s victory in a war
D、in the Jordan River
答案
A
解析
第2段第9句中的stela是一个生词,结合上下文和下一段第1句中的the stone可以推断victory stela是一个“胜利纪念碑”,因此本题应选A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/EtJK777K
0
专业英语四级
相关试题推荐
VisitorstoBritainmayfindthebestplacetosamplelocalcultureisinatraditionalpub.Butthesefriendlyhostelriescanb
Womendriversaremorelikelytobeinvolvedinanaccident,accordingtoscientists.Researchers【C1】______6.5millioncar
Womendriversaremorelikelytobeinvolvedinanaccident,accordingtoscientists.Researchers【C1】______6.5millioncar
Mostpeoplewhogoonlinehavemainlypositiveexperience.But,【C1】______anyendeavor—traveling,cooking,orattendingschool—t
Theconceptofpersonalchoiceinrelationtohealthbehaviorsisanimportantone.Anestimated90percentofallillnessmayb
Theconceptofpersonalchoiceinrelationtohealthbehaviorsisanimportantone.Anestimated90percentofallillnessmayb
RiteofPassageisagoodnovelbyanystandards;______,itshouldrankhighonanylistofsciencefiction.
______fromthetopofthehill,thecitytakestheroundshapewithaflowingriverthroughit.
(1)Springishere:flowersareinbloom,birdsongfillstheair,andtheinboxesofemployersarefilledwithdesperateappeals
(1)Springishere:flowersareinbloom,birdsongfillstheair,andtheinboxesofemployersarefilledwithdesperateappeals
随机试题
PCP是由下列哪种病原体引起的A.汉坦病毒B.立克次体C.卡氏肺孢菌D.组织胞浆菌E.腺病毒
A、利血平B、哌唑嗪C、氯沙坦D、氢氯噻嗪E、普萘洛尔高血压伴有糖尿病及痛风者,不宜选用的药物是
关于高渗性非酮症糖尿病昏迷患者。下述描写哪一项是错误的
表证和里证的鉴别需要辨清
关于抗消化性溃疡药A、组胺H2受体阻断剂B、抗酸药C、硫糖铝D、西咪替丁E、铋剂应在餐前服用,服用后可致粪便变黑的是
根据《处方药与非处方药流通管理暂行规定》,关于药品零售企业销售处方药、非处方药,叙述正确的有
吕老太太,因为胆道梗阻出现黄疸,其尿液颜色为
焊接电流的大小,对焊接影响较大的是()。
如图所示,A、B两小球从相同高度同时水平抛出,经过时间t在空中相遇,若两球的抛出速度都变为原来的2倍,则两球从抛出到相遇经过的时间为()。
1978年,我国开展的一场马克思主义思想解放运动是()
最新回复
(
0
)