Isn't it amazing that this mighty and legendary king left no evidence of his existence? Or, evidence of his mighty empire?
From Wikipedia:
"Secular evidence about a historical figure comparable to Solomon, reported independently from the religious accounts, seems scarce and so far no substantial evidence has been found. Various inscriptions have been found and excavations are continuing."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon
2006-09-21 08:22:54 · 17 answers · asked by Left the building 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The KEY WORD is "SECULAR."
PLEASE do not waste my time citing Pat Roberton's book of archaeology. Or any other book produced by a religious organization or individual.
Thanks.
2006-09-21 08:28:56 · update #1
Girl wonder, you are correct and the fact that 3 people marked your answer as a "bad answer" (so far) indicates those reading your answer do not know what they are talking about.
2006-09-21 08:31:12 · update #2
AR, are you trying to be funny?
From your link (thanks for wasting my time):
"NARRATOR: The two most important biblical finds in a generation were proven to be fakes. There was no archaeological proof for the existence of Jesus Christ. There was no evidence for the existence of The Temple of Solomon."
2006-09-21 08:38:55 · update #3
Pudding:
In regards to the Tel Dan Stele, it is under dispute as to its actual interpretation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele
2006-09-21 08:54:39 · update #4
some of you seem to be missing the point.
IF Solomon was the person he is depicted to be, logic dictates that there would be dramatic evidence of his existence and reign. As it is, there is nothing of substance to prove he even existed, much less ruled over anything.
2006-09-21 08:57:40 · update #5
That's true. They never found evidence of the Jews escaping the Egyptians and spending 40 years in the desert, either.
2006-09-21 08:25:40 · answer #1 · answered by Girl Wonder 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋
There are a few references.
According to Josephus, King Solomon often took a morning chariot ride from Jerusalem those 13 km (8 mi) out to Etam, where there were gardens and streams. (Jewish Antiquities, VIII, 186 [vii, 3]) The town was rebuilt and fortified by Solomon’s successor Rehoboam. (2 Chron. 11:5, 6.) According to the Talmud, an aqueduct linked Jerusalem with a spring to the W of Etam.—Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 31a; Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud, Yoma 41a.
Archaeological findings attest to the material prosperity of Solomon’s reign. The book The Archaeology of the Land of Israel states: “The wealth that flowed into the royal court from all directions, and the flourishing commerce . . . brought about a rapid and noticeable revolution in every aspect of material culture.”
I hope this helps a little.
2006-09-21 08:33:55 · answer #2 · answered by Jeremy Callahan 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Receipt that mentions Solomon's Temple: From the link
Another important find is the House of Yahweh Ostracon, which is a pottery shard dated to about 800 BC that contains a written receipt for a donation of silver shekels to Solomon's Temple. Written approximately 130 years after the completion of the Temple, this appears to be the earliest mention of Solomon's Temple outside the Bible
[edit] Now you are straining. The Tel Dan Stele is not what mentions Solomon's Temple. See my link again.
2006-09-21 08:25:17 · answer #3 · answered by BABY 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You said..Various inscriptions have been found and excavations are continuing...
So why don't you wait for the result before talking so much nonsense?
Within the last 20 years, archaeologists discovered many truths in the bible which they formerly said were lies.
It may be impossible to invent a Solomon who was so wise yet had hundreds of wives...don't you think?
2006-09-21 08:30:08 · answer #4 · answered by Roxton P 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Good King Solomon was one of the sons of David and is in the blood line of the Son of God on his Dad side, Jesus Christ. All I know about Solomon is what is written the Holy Bible. But, with all of his wisdom, he did betray God and his people by worshiping money and foreign gods and idols, because of his many wives. So, whether there is fact behind the Holy Bible is up to all of us to believe and have faith in.
2006-09-21 08:28:36 · answer #5 · answered by marcyfiorica 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"Historical figure((("comparable"))) to Solomon doesnt say it was Solomon. And "comparable is not stating it was him. Also, to go off of "one" bit of information may not be accurate. Perhaps searching further may give more answers. This does not state any accurate claims that there is not "evidence" based on this particular information source.
2006-09-21 08:38:29 · answer #6 · answered by yeppers 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Do you suppose much of the Old Testament is metaphor and allegory? Jesus used parables -- perhaps he learned to teach that way by studying the Torah.
Everything in the Bible is true -- and some of it actually happened.
.
2006-09-21 08:37:50 · answer #7 · answered by Hatikvah 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Solomon thought that every thing that man does in this world, as pertaining to this world, was emptiness of emptiness's, and grasping after the wind. So I am not much surprised that he did not leave much evidence of his sojourn upon this earth.
2006-09-21 08:29:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well if you read that after his death and several kings later that everything was destroyed and the "spoils" of war were taken.
Did you know centaurs are supposed to be mythical creatures right? Look at the Unversity of Tennessee Library. They have on display the bones of one.
2006-09-21 08:30:49 · answer #9 · answered by Naddo 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, King Solomon was a very wise King.
What's your question and or point?
He was a great Hebrew King and you can ask any Jew about their history and they will tell you all about Him.
2006-09-21 08:27:01 · answer #10 · answered by Salvation is a gift, Eph 2:8-9 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋