Inscription indicates Kingdom of Israel existed in the 10th century BCE

A breakthrough in the research of the Bible has shed new light on the period in which the Bible could have been written, testifying to Hebrew writing abilities as early as the 10th century BCE, the University of Haifa announced on Thursday.

Prof. Gershon Galil of the Department of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa recently deciphered an inscription dating from the 10th century BCE, and showed that it was a Hebrew inscription, making it the earliest known Hebrew writing.

This breakthrough indicates that at least some of the scriptures were composed hundreds of years before the dates previously believed, and that the Kingdom of Israel already existed at that time. The 10th century BCE was the period of King David’s reign.

The inscription itself, which was written in ink on a 15 cm X 16.5 cm trapezoid pottery shard, was discovered a year and a half ago at excavations that were carried out by Prof. Yosef Garfinkel at Khirbet Qeiyafa near the Elah Valley.

Read more: jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1262339428603&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I cannot stand BCE and CE :mad:

But definitely a good article. It reminds me of how scholars didn't believe the three wise men were real, and then they unearthed coins with one of their names on it :)

So they have found some writing that dates back to the 10th century Before Christ’s Era? Thats great

[quote="ljubim, post:2, topic:182529"]
I cannot stand BCE and CE

[/quote]

Well, it makes it easier for Christians, Jews, and other faiths to communicate on historical matters. After all, would you feel comfortable referring to the year in terms of someone else's God?

Can you give me a link for that? I’d be interested in reading about that.

I also dislike them. But we have to live with them, so I refer to them as “Before Christian Era” and “Christian Era”, just to make the hair on the secularist’s backs stand up.

Yeah, Christ calls on us to remove references to Christ as a way of making people feel more comfortable. It’s little wonder that the Church is dying away with this type of reasoning.

[quote="NewEnglandPries, post:4, topic:182529"]
After all, would you feel comfortable referring to the year in terms of someone else's God?

[/quote]

There is only BC. Are there other ones out there?

They can refer to whatever god's name they want but the world does not acknowledge it, so why would I be uncomfortable.

So everytime someone who is Christian is talking to a Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist historian or scientist we have to have conversion calendars out so that each can reference years by their own deities and prophets? If you lived in a majority Pagan country would you freely refer to the year as, say, 9637 in the Year of Our God Yeeshina (obviously a made up example)? Or would you claim that your faith made it impossible for you to use such a title for a pagan god?
Someone who is not Christian is validly going to say that it violates their conscience to refer to this as “in the Year of Our Lord” (AD) in reference to Jesus. Its the same as if you were forced to call someone else’s god “our Lord” when referencing a date.

The use of “common era” is a way to preserve the common calendar and allow other faiths to freely use the same measuring of years. Otherwise history and science would get quite messy.

It’s little wonder that the Church is dying away with this type of reasoning.

Right, and being unreasonably intolerant does wonders for the Christian message.

So if society decided it wanted to call this “in the year of our Goddess x” you would freely use that? I highly doubt it. You’d be screaming that you don’t care what the rest of the world does you refuse to refer to anything as “our Goddess.” Nor do I think you’d freely reference the year according to the age of the Hindu god Bramha, the Creator. Simply saying, “the world does it my way” is no way to reason since there might come a day when the world does it differently.

While most of the world uses the Gregorian calendar for secular purposes, other cultures have preserved their calendar system for religious and cultural purposes. Currently its the year: General Islam 1431, Iran 1388, Judaism 5770, and Hinduism (anywhere from the 5000’s to the 500’s depending on which one is used).

[quote="NewEnglandPries, post:10, topic:182529"]
So if society decided it wanted to call this "in the year of our Goddess x" you would freely use that? I highly doubt it. You'd be screaming that you don't care what the rest of the world does you refuse to refer to anything as "our Goddess." Nor do I think you'd freely reference the year according to the age of the Hindu god Bramha, the Creator. Simply saying, "the world does it my way" is no way to reason since there might come a day when the world does it differently.

While most of the world uses the Gregorian calendar for secular purposes, other cultures have preserved their calendar system for religious and cultural purposes. Currently its the year: General Islam 1431, Iran 1388, Judaism 5770, and Hinduism (anywhere from the 5000's to the 500's depending on which one is used).

[/quote]

Except this case is different. CE and BCE are simply the politically correct, "non-offensive" ways of saying AD and BC. They are still the exact same calendar.

It wil be a bit ridiculous if you lived in, say, Saudi Arabia, and used the correct Muslim calendar year of 1431, but then made up some other initials to secularize it.

People are ridiculous.

[quote="joeflow, post:11, topic:182529"]
Except this case is different. CE and BCE are simply the politically correct, "non-offensive" ways of saying AD and BC. They are still the exact same calendar.

It wil be a bit ridiculous if you lived in, say, Saudi Arabia, and used the correct Muslim calendar year of 1431, but then made up some other initials to secularize it.

People are ridiculous.

[/quote]

You're missing the point. Most of the world does use the Gregorian calendar for secular purposes and professional research in history and science use the same as well. However, people of other faiths do not like to refer to dates as "in the Year of Our Lord (Jesus)" or "Before Christ (anointed/messiah)". Its "politically correct" so that a Jew, a Muslim, a Christian, and a Hindu, etc. can all converse, do research and write papers in ways that reference dates in an acceptable way to all consciences.

I had a professor back in college that urged the class to use “BCE” and “CE” dating conventions. Needless to say, I refused and kept using “BC” and “AD”. If I’m writing a paper and am going to date my work, I’ll use whatever dating convention I **** well please. If a person is offended by seeing “BC” and “AD”, then they have a mental disorder and need psychological evaluation.

Likewise, if I went into a country heavily populated by Muslims that used their respective dating system, then that’s fine. It’s part of their culture just as Christianity and the Gregorian calender is part of Western Civ culture, to which the U.S. is part of.

BC and AD has been used for over 1400 years. BCE and CE started being used a little over 150 yrs ago by Jewish scholars. BCE and CE did not become commonly used outside of Jewish scholarly writings until the 21st century. What changed in the past 10 yrs that make it problematic for Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and other non-Christians, except Jews that makes it problematic to reference dates using BC and AD? Why didn’t it become problematic for these groups as soon as the countries that they where predominate in adopted the Gregorian calendar?

[quote="NewEnglandPries, post:9, topic:182529"]
Right, and being unreasonably intolerant does wonders for the Christian message.

[/quote]

Your form of tolerance is simply humanistic fascism masquerading as compassion and understanding.

[quote="Andrew1983, post:13, topic:182529"]
If a person is offended by seeing "BC" and "AD", then they have a mental disorder and need psychological evaluation.

[/quote]

Its a mental disorder if someone who doesn't believe in Jesus to not want to call him "our Lord"?????

Likewise, if I went into a country heavily populated by Muslims that used their respective dating system, then that's fine. It's part of their culture just as Christianity and the Gregorian calender is part of Western Civ culture, to which the U.S. is part of.

So if you were in a Hindu community that wanted you to call one of their gods "our god" or "our lord" you would do so? I doubt it.

LOL.

The reasons why anything changes are complicated and particular to each situation. Lots of terms are accepted for long periods of time only to have a group take offense to them at a later date.
However the fact remains that we would never refer to anyone else’s god as “our lord” or “messiah” so to expect other faiths to refer to Jesus in such terms is rather illogical.

This is a hypothetical question that really has nothing to with rebutting my earlier post.

What I resent is being told that the dominant culture of the country that I live in has to change its dating system because some people might feel offended at seeing “Ano Domine” spelled out, or just AD. If you are genuinely offended at the sight of AD, In the year of our Lord, Ano Domine, etc. despite it’s being in use since before the inception of the U.S. as it’s own independent nation, then you either need to man up and grow a thick skin, see a shrink, or get out.

Is the bc ad v bce ce thing still going on? I thought it was just a fad. I remember seeing it around a bit then it dissapeared. Even non Christian news websites that was using bce and ce. Have changed back to bc and ad. (Australian news sites) I think the whole bid to change to bce and ce is a bit of a fail… Because its the year 2010. What happen 2010 years ago? Ya that right. And what are all the bce years counting down to, before they start going up in ce years? Ya that right too.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.