This happens to be a new series that was put forward by Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, which provides the debunking as pertains to the biblical assumptions that are commonly held in applying for the dated Biblical scholarship. Apparently, she seems to have it that presentation of people with outdated versions during the 18th century Biblical scholarship tend to appear astonishing or, just like Francesca alleges, one ought to prove themselves “uncomfortable” with regard to the modern viewer. It is unfortunate that though the most astonishing things when considering “The Bible’s Buried Secrets” normally happened to be the presenter’s vapidity and the particular programs those of the anti-Christian and the anti-Jewish tend to bias.
What was at least not threatening, though, was the fact that the BBC had ensured commissioning of the diatribe, it being against the Israelites. The BBC appeared to be obsessed with vilifying the democracy of the Middle East. Stavrakopoulou was convinced that most of the Britons had a better understanding of the Books of Kings and Samuel in the Bible. She might have also relied on the fact that most of her audience is not bible readers, and with that it is much easier to trick their unsuspecting minds. This was much easier as most of them accept scriptures as a doubted history or just mere science. However she seems to be prejudiced in comparison to the views of Christians and even to those of the Jews, although she appears to have an admiration for the Muslims. Perhaps it might have been as a result of her lecturing University of Exeter prominently known for its “pro-Islamic links”.
Get a price quote:
What is mostly behind the idea in The Bible’s Buried Secret is that probably that King David of the Bible never existed and if this happens to be true, Stavrakopoulou argues that the present-day Israel may be undermined. She argues out that, Israel’s founding fathers might have used King David’s story only to justify their resettlement of Palestine, hence putting into questions any archeological evidence the Jewish archeologists might have discovered. She is even quoted as being said that Jewish archeologists dig “with a trowel in one hand and a Bible in the other.
Thou Francesca seemed more like an undergraduate referring to the Graf’s and Wellhausen works, she for once overestimated King David’s role as quoted from the Bible thus she kept giving a reference of “Davidic empire” which she said is a resemblance of a “post-industrial mass-urbanized civilization.” But King David’s society as given out in Hebrew Bible contradicts such kind of a description. From the sources and the Bible authors, they quote nothing depicts such kind of an imperialists state, in fact, going by this it might appear to be the size of Wales. As a result, from her explanations, Dr. Stavrakopoulou depicts a situation in which she expects the 10th Century BC Israel to the one which rose to be the later civilizations of the Babylonians and the Romans.
Due to the fact that she could hardly find any remains of larger cities from the 10th Century is never a surprise but according to her this only points out a “non-existence of King David and the utter unreliability of findings by Jewish archeologists”. Following her claims, she seems to contradict any evidence citing the existence of King David in later periods of may be 9th Century. But she forgot to highlight that there remains some amounts of Biblical dates confusion as some archeologists argue out that most of the remains from 9th and 10th Century BC might have co-existed.
Hire our qualified writers!
Not enough time to create an assignment by yourself?Order now
- on time delivery
- original content
- quality writing
Therefore, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, being a critic of the 1890’s, asserts that the Bible should never be depicted to have any historical value unless only proved by archeology or any historic documents from the same period. Most Christians attest to the fact that most Bible writers weren’t historians but from knowledge most of them wrote only to highlight theological implications discovered in their own historical experience. This is not to say that the Biblical scriptures are historically unreliable but, most Hebrew Scriptures give much regards to certain human societies that gave rise to major historical texts. But as often discovered, passages of the Bible are most probably the only one that depicts a history of certain people, for example, that of the Roman Caesars.
Dr. Stavrakopoulou highlights the fact that various bible stories are reliable due to their reference from reliable historical sources although some seems to contradict themselves due to conflicting sources. Hence the Bible has various historical sources and traditions thus gaining confidence in its validity. Many may argue that the Bible contains information that runs against the reason as to why it was written depicting that it has simple stories full of goodies and baddies. One story attesting to this is the story “Solomon’s tyrannical rule” and the murder of Uriah by David in which most editor are not afraid to bring out the weaknesses even of the prominent leaders. Despite this, Dr. Stavrakopoulou as she attempted to bring out the brilliant side of Emperor David forgot the actual character depicted in the Bible. In fact, she, claims the Philistines to be barbarians a claim which is not in the Scriptures as the First Book of Samuel in the Bible depicts them as superior to Israelites and were greatly feared and envied.
Dr. Stavrakopoulou correctly pointed some of the dangers that often allow one’s research to be dominated by politics but according to her, it seemed unacceptable that Jews and Christians are mostly motivated by self-interest. Even when she was narrating the documentary, she seemed t display lots of bias towards the plight of Palestinians whom she often referred as Muslims. Her lack of objectivity is greatly highlighted especially when she lists the variety of settlers who lived in Jerusalem since the era of King David. In accordance to her chronology, Arabs settled before Christians but she omitted the fact that Arab Christians lived in Jerusalem 600 years earlier than Islam was founded.
Get 15% OFF
You can get limited discount for your first order
Code: special15Get it now
Therefore, this documentary smacked of a prejudice against the Israelites which is common among people who are Islamophilic. It almost seemed like Dr. Francesca actually had a belief that the authors of the Bible, wrote the first and the second books of Samuel in the bible, provided the modern day Israel with a historical legitimacy. It is like in her thoughts it appeared that the authors of the Bible had foreseen a situation when the Jewish people would have the need of proving that the land of Israel and Judea was theirs. May be, seeing the acceptability of the Biblical literature which was written during the Babylonian Exile may Dr. Francesca had a point although she lost the political reasons which were part of the Hebrew Bible, where the authors were simply trying to legitimize their period after Israel’s exile from the Babylonian captivity(Atkinson).
It is noted that as you watch the documentary, you notice that Francesca has “overplayed the link between the modern state of Israel and the Biblical History”. This is because most of the Israelites founding fathers were known for being socialist and secular, but not in their observing of religion. But an argument can also be raised that they may be overly concerned with an attempt to make legitimate their new state by making an appeal to the scripture. It is normally stated that the Jews occupied the ancient land of Israel many ages earlier and after King David’s era. The land they settle was first given the name Palestine by Hadrian in a genocide which killed tens of thousands of Jews. Hence, whether David ruled over an empire compared to the size of Wales, that’s not an issue to those who desire to bring down Israel in Ancient Hebraic history.