Archaeologists Excavate Biblical Giant Goliath's Hometown

July 11, 2011 http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/11/in-israel-archaeologists-unearth-bibles-bad-guys

TEL EL-SAFI, Israel – They haven't found the slingshot -- not yet anyway.

But as archaeologists continue excavation at Gath -- the Biblical home of Goliath, the giant warrior improbably felled by the young shepherd David and his sling -- they are piecing together the history of the Philistines, a people remembered chiefly as the bad guys of the Hebrew Bible.

Close to three millennia ago, the city of Gath was on the frontier between the Philistines, who occupied the Mediterranean coastal plain, and the Israelites, who controlled the inland hills. The city's most famous resident, according to the Book of Samuel, was Goliath, famously felled by a well slung stone.

The Philistines "are the ultimate other, almost, in the biblical story," said Aren Maeir of Bar-Ilan University, the archaeologist in charge of the excavation.

The latest summer excavation season began this past week, with 100 diggers from Canada, South Korea, the United States and elsewhere, adding to the wealth of relics found at the site since Maier's project began in 1996.

In a square hole, several Philistine jugs nearly 3,000 years old were emerging from the soil. One painted shard just unearthed had a rust-red frame and a black spiral: a decoration common in ancient Greek art and a hint to the Philistines' origins in the Aegean.

The Philistines arrived by sea from the area of modern-day Greece around 1200 B.C. They went on to rule major ports at Ashkelon and Ashdod, now cities in Israel, and at Gaza, now part of the Palestinian territory known as the Gaza Strip.

At Gath, they settled on a site that had been inhabited since prehistoric times. Digs like this one have shown that though they adopted aspects of local culture, they did not forget their roots. Even five centuries after their arrival, for example, they were still worshipping gods with Greek names.

Archaeologists have found that the Philistine diet leaned heavily on grass pea lentils, an Aegean staple. Ancient bones discarded at the site show that they also ate pigs and dogs, unlike the neighboring Israelites, who deemed those animals unclean -- restrictions that still exist in Jewish dietary law.

Diggers at Gath have also uncovered traces of a destruction of the city in the 9th century B.C., including a ditch and embankment built around the city by a besieging army -- still visible as a dark line running across the surrounding hills.

The razing of Gath at that time appears to have been the work of the Aramean king Hazael in 830 B.C., an incident mentioned in the Book of Kings.

Gath's importance is that the "wonderful assemblage of material culture" uncovered there sheds light on how the Philistines lived in the 10th and 9th centuries B.C., said Seymour Gitin, director of the W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research in Jerusalem and an expert on the Philistines.

That would include the era of the kingdom ruled from Jerusalem by David and Solomon, if such a kingdom existed as described in the Bible. Other Philistine sites have provided archaeologists with information about earlier and later times but not much from that key period.

"Gath fills a very important gap in our understanding of Philistine history," Gitin said.

In 604 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon invaded and put the Philistines' cities to the sword. There is no remnant of them after that.

Crusaders arriving from Europe in 1099 built a fortress on the remains of Gath, and later the site became home to an Arab village, Tel el-Safi, which emptied during the war surrounding Israel's creation in 1948. Today Gath is in a national park.

An Israeli town founded in 1955 several miles to the south, Kiryat Gat, was named after Gath based on a misidentification of a different ruin as the Philistine city.

The memory of the Philistines -- or a somewhat one-sided version -- was preserved in the Hebrew Bible.

The hero Samson, who married a Philistine woman, skirmished with them repeatedly before being betrayed and taken, blinded and bound, to their temple at Gaza. There, the story goes, he broke free and shattered two support pillars, bringing the temple down and killing everyone inside, including himself.

One intriguing find at Gath is the remains of a large structure, possibly a temple, with two pillars. Maeir has suggested that this might have been a known design element in Philistine temple architecture when it was written into the Samson story.

Diggers at Gath have also found shards preserving names similar to Goliath -- an Indo-European name, not a Semitic one of the kind that would have been used by the local Canaanites or Israelites. These finds show the Philistines indeed used such names and suggest that this detail, too, might be drawn from an accurate picture of their society.

The findings at the site support the idea that the Goliath story faithfully reflects something of the geopolitical reality of the period, Maeir said -- the often violent interaction of the powerful Philistines of Gath with the kings of Jerusalem in the frontier zone between them.

"It doesn't mean that we're one day going to find a skull with a hole in its head from the stone that David slung at him, but it nevertheless tells that this reflects a cultural milieu that was actually there at the time," Maeir said.

Did King David Have Herpes?

King David Said: "For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease... " -Psalms 38:7
King David Said: "My lovers and my friends stand aloof from my sore;... " -Psalms 38:11

According to the internet's Wikipedia, herpes has been around for at least 2,000 years. Remember, Ecclesiastes 1:9 says there is no new thing under the sun. Therefore, research the example of lined up Scriptures below because they are part of the Bible's system of secret messages that manifest in numbered parallels (parables) to be read downward to form a sentence. And for proof that these parallels are not coincidences, check out the book called Aimed At America because it contains more revelations & confirmations of this system of secret messages that can only line up in the King James Bible!

2nd Samuel 2:5 "... David... "
2nd Thessalonians 2:5 "... told you... "
1st Kings 2:5 "... about his loins, and... "
Hosea 2:5 "... lovers, that give... "
Esther 2:5 "... name... "
Romans 2:5 "... and revelation of... "
Psalms 2:5 "... his sore... "
Exodus 2:5 "... when... "
Song of Solomon 2:5 "... sick of love."

Parallels: "And they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, (for they are a rebellious house,) yet shall know that there hath been a prophet among them." -Ezekiel 2:5

Vince Carthane, author of Aimed At America: Bible Codes That Shoot Down Deceivers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETobjYK_Uk8
Contact info (727) 557-9613
P.O. Box 1596
Saint Pete, Fl 33731

Michelangelo's David in the USA

Thanks to Joan D'Arc of Paranoia magazine...

After a two year loan to the United States Michelangelo's David is being returned to Italy...

Same Sex Couples in the Bible: David & Jonathan

http://www.rainbowallianceopenfaith.homestead.com/GayLove3.html

Same Sex Couples in the Bible
David & Jonathan
There is no real need to bring out a passage showing approval of homosexuality. After all, the Bible condemns only those actions it actually condemns, and homosexuality is not one of those things.

However, even though they are not strictly necessary, there *are* several passages that show approval of gay relationships.

To mention just one, there is the love affair between David and Jonathan.

1 Samuel 18:1,3

"And it came to pass, when he [David] had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul . . . And Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul."

And immediately afterward, Jonathan disrobed before David:

1 Samuel 18:4

"Jonathan divested himself of the mantle he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his military dress, and his sword, his bow and his belt.

Jonathan was not only disrobing, but was turning the symbols of his manhood over to David. This draws a very clear picture of what is happening here.

1 Samuel 20:30

"Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse [David] to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?"

Reference to the nakedness of one's parents is one of the methods used in the Bible to refer to a sexual relationship. Jonathan had chosen David as his lover. And in the same conversations Saul says:

1 Samuel 20:31

Why, as long as the son of Jesse lives upon the earth you cannot make good your claim to the kingship!

This clarifies Saul's problem. One of the most important duties of being a king was producing an heir. Obviously, Jonathan had no intention of producing an heir, and therefore could not provide the final step needed to make good his claim to the kingship. He loved David and *only* David.

1 Samuel 20:41

" . . . they [David and Jonathan] kissed one another, and wept one with another . . . "

Here they are displaying a deep affection for one another, and showing an emotional attachment well beyond what would be shown by two heterosexuals in a similar situation. They actually weep together because of their upcoming forced separation.

2 Samuel 1:26

[After Jonathan's death, David said,] "I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women."

As you can see, they were very much in love. The Bible shows them kissing one another -- not a normal activity for heterosexual men. To make sure you don't miss the sexual aspect, the love is compared (favorably, by the way) with the love of a woman. Their souls were knit together in love, and they made a covenant because of their love. Just think about how many covenants are made because of love. The covenant of marriage sort of sticks out. The actions immediately following that declaration of love are also unmistakable. Not many covenants made because of love result in the participants disrobing in each other's presence, but one such covenant -- the covenant of marriage -- does.

The comment about the nakedness of Jonathan's mother in the discussion of his relationship with David strongly implies a sexual element to the relationship. This just reiterates what is already obvious.

To emphasize the point, Saul offers his oldest daughter Meroh to David, but David turns down the offer. He then offers his younger daughter Michel to David, who loves David, but David also turns this down. Something very interesting here is that, even though the Bible says that Michel loved David, there is no reciprical "David loved Michel" statement. David finally agrees to marry Michel, but not for love, but rather for the benefit of having the king as his father-in-law.

1 Samuel 18:26

"When the servants reported this offer to David, he was pleased with the prospect of becoming the king's son-in-law."

Note that there is no mention of being pleased at the prospect of marrying Michel, bit only with becoming the king's son-in-law.

David was obviously bisexual. But with a preference for men, since he found his love for Jonathan to be wonderful, passing the love of women. As a King he *had* to have a harem and produce heirs, no matter his sexual orientation, but his one true love was Jonathan.

You know, I have thought about how *I* would have phrased things to clearly show a homosexual relationship in the Bible. Other than describing the physical act itself, which I would not do, I would have done it by saying that they loved each other. To make absolutely clear that this was a gay relationship that was the equivalent of marriage, I would have said that they made a covenant between each other because of their love. I doubt that I sould have gone as far as to show them disrobing as the Bible does, but I might add in the symbolism of giving up the sword. Just in case that got missed, though I would have found it hard to believe that this could be misconstrued, I would have shown an example of physical affection, perhaps going as far as to say they kissed. Surely that would be enough for *anyone* to know that this was a gay relationship. But just in case anyone managed to deny that, I would have added something like having one of the characters compare their relationship to a relationship with a woman, and find this one better. No one could possibly misinterpret *that* one. But just to make *absolutely* sure that it could not be mistaken for anything but a homosexual relationship that included a sexual element, I would use one of the code phrases used to point out a sexual relationship, such as a reference to "the confusion of thy mother's nakedness".

Actually, I probably would never have gone that far, because I would not have believed that anyone could *possibly* miss the obvious. But I cannot think of *anything* that I could have written that would have made the point beyond what is actually shown here.