首页
登录
职称英语
(1)Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christ
(1)Who has never heard of King David? There are probably not too many Christ
游客
2023-10-31
39
管理
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. [br] The author is most likely to agree that ______.
选项
A、it doesn’t really matter whether there is proof of David or not(Para. 1)
B、the stone did not actually mention the ’House of David.’(Para. 3)
C、the Bible is built on facts as well as faith(Para. 4)
D、Bible is historically true across the board(Para. 4)
答案
C
解析
原文最后一句中的historical record as well as a basis of faith表明作者认为《圣经》是以历史事实和信念为基础的,这与C的内容相同。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3144916.html
相关试题推荐
Howwelookandhowweappeartoothersprobablyworriesusmorewhenweare
Howwelookandhowweappeartoothersprobablyworriesusmorewhenweare
(1)WhohasneverheardofKingDavid?ThereareprobablynottoomanyChrist
(1)WhohasneverheardofKingDavid?ThereareprobablynottoomanyChrist
Theword"open"isreallyusedalot.You’veprobablyheard"openup"inman
PASSAGETHREE[br]Whatdoestheword"non-demented"inParagraph2probablymea
FamousChristmasPlacesTherearemany【T1】______traditionsinChristmas.【T
FamousChristmasPlacesTherearemany【T1】______traditionsinChristmas.【T
FamousChristmasPlacesTherearemany【T1】______traditionsinChristmas.【T
FamousChristmasPlacesTherearemany【T1】______traditionsinChristmas.【T
随机试题
()是面向对象方法中最基本的封装单元,它可以把客户要使用的方法和数据呈现给外部
青蒿在青蒿鳖甲汤中的作用是A.芳香辟秽,清退虚热 B.清热透络,引邪外出 C
A.膈膨升 B.外伤性膈疝 C.先天性后外侧膈疝 D.胸骨旁疝 E.食管
云南地形复杂,海拔高差悬殊,特别是横断山区,地势海拔垂直分布明显,是世界高等植物
2016年,我国全年完成邮电业务收入总量43344亿元,比上年增长52.7%。其
亚急性细菌性心内膜炎不引起A.慢性瓣膜病 B.局灶性肾小球肾炎 C.多发性栓
甲在家私设银行、钱庄,非法办理存款贷款业务,他这种非法吸收公众存款的行为属于(
根据《立法法》的规定,下列属于行政法规可以规定的事项有:()A.有关国务院
下列关于城建税减税、免税的表述,错误的是( )。A.城建税原则上不单独规定减免税
患者为右利手,意识清,能理解他人讲话内容,但不能表达自己的意图,病变在A、左侧额
最新回复
(
0
)