1/20 Lecture

Today in lecture we discussed the most important passage to the Christian faith--the Promise to David. In 2 Samuel 7, after he conquers Jerusalem and builds a magnificent palace for himself, King David decides to build a house for God. In response, God tells Nathan, who is the court prophet to David, that God Himself will build David a house. Then God continues "When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth fro your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me... Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever." In this context, the "house" God promises to David can be interpreted as a dynasty. This eternal promise to David assures that the Davidic line will never pass away. I thought that this passage was very interesting because in the Hebrew Bible, Jesus is often referred to as the "Son of David." This is because David's genealogy becomes important through God's promise. In addition, God states in the passage that David's son will build a house for Him, which Solomon, one of David's sons, fulfills further validating this scripture passage. 

To sum up the past several lectures so far, Jerusalem's Sacredness is established and supported by these following passages:

1) God Chooses Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 12; 2 samuel 24)

2) The Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 24:12-31:18)

3) Creating and the Sabbath (Genesis 1-2)

4) Jerusalem & Mt. Moriah (Genesis 22; 2 Chronicles 3)

5) Melchizedek's Salem & Jerusalem (Ps 110; 76:2)

After discussion of David, we then moved onto Solomon's Jerusalem. Just like David, there is no archaeological evidence and only literary evidence that Solomon built the Temple or even existed. But there is abundance of literary evidence that King Solomon (~970-930 BCE) was a "wise" King who built the Temple for God, one of his many accomplishments. However, strictly speaking, there is no significant archaeological evidence from Solomon's Temple and thus a whole set of arguments that rise as to whether absence of evidence is evidence of absence. 

I thought that differing opinions regarding Tel Megiddo, which was the place where all ancient battles took place, was very interesting because not only did such large-scale excavations such as this just seemed unimaginable but how different archaeologists interpreted the same findings differently (ie. dating evidence and assigning different layers to different tine periods) also seemed very daunting. It gave me respect for archaeologists and their field. However, there have been some fragmentary archaeological evidence that show that Solomon's Temple resembles other temples from the same time period, such as Tel Ta'yinat and 'Ain Dara. This evidence and further support from the Bible then seem to suggest that Solomon's Temple actually existed. Although I believe that descriptions of Solomon's Temple might have been derived from these other temples to make the existence of this Temple seem more believable, I do see the value in such an argument. 

Overall, from this lecture I have gained insight and respect for the field of archaeology and I find the whole set of arguments over the existence of Solomon and his Temple fascinating.