All in all, this is a pointless thread. The people who believe in god will continue to believe the bible is the ultimate truth even in the absence of archaeological evidence. The people who don't believe in god won't accept that archaeological evidence of one small biblical statement verifies the rest will continue to reject it as the ultimate truth. So all this thread does is flag up who believes and who doesn't. Which surely underpins my contention that what religious people really want is not to convert me to their religion but to justify a way to treat me differently.
Look at the ribbon in the reply box. See the B and the T! symbols in there? They change font with a bunch of other stuff. You knew that right? No one can be that unknowledgeable about how to format a post when they have made nearly 28 thousand of them like you have. So how is it you've managed to format thousands of your posts? The whole of your post, even that which is typed and isn't paste, it is in shouting font. If you don't know how to change the font when posting stuff, you could have said at the time there is no intention to shout. Any normal, reasonable person who wasn't being angry in God and Jesus threads, who saw they were shouting , would have done either of those things. But of course non of this changes how you linked it to another artifact entirely, which in itself, made the point for me! These artifacts are two a penny. They don't confirm anything about biblical accounts, apart from confirming that fiction can contain real place names. Take your own responsibility for getting angry at most every statement made about God or Jesus you don't like. You can't pass that anger onto to me as if it's my fault. Well that's the thing isn't it. You don't correct, you just get angry. I ask you to explain something specifically, to correct something, like the false claim in the thread title but all you can really do is immediately get angry and start name calling. This short thread alone bears testament to your anger and as usual, you still haven't explained how the claim in the thread title is not false. If you are one of those some, who wish others to genuinely understand religious faith, then clearly, religious faith is to be angry.
But the believer doesn't need evidence, in fact looking for evidence is a statement of non-belief. And finding the evidence of a physical artefact from the same age as that described in the bible doesn't make someone become a believer in all the rest of the stuff that's in the bible. Like I said, this is all pointless.
Can you believe he's a Sunday school teacher? "Oh! What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive".
shouting is using capitals... your entire premise is based on a lie. By definition shouting is using all capitals. I will show you an example below in my summary. 2. the rest of your post is more lies and misrepresentations. you disputed the provenance of the seal. I explained that the experts had found plenty of other similar seals some of them apparently found on the site of the former administrative office in jerusalem where the seals would have been applied. Summary... if you wish to dispute the provenance or the experts methods.... USE YOUR BRAINS NOT YOUR BULLSHIT AND LINK TO SOME PROOF. SHOUTING IS WHEN YOU USE ALL CAPS see the link below... https://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/2014/04/how-capital-letters-became-internet-code-shouting
some believers do need evidence before they begin to believe. I know some. I am not saying you should believe anything because of a seal found in jerusalem. To me that seal is just one tiny (almost inconsequential) piece of evidence showing that at least some of the bible is consistent with history. If you have been observing over the last few decades the pendulum is starting to swing back. For a while many were arguing that almost nothing in the bible is consistent with historical fact. However, lately more and more pieces of evidence are showing that it is. But, again... that is not the point of faith. I think the point is that the God of the old Testament is the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob and that the point of the old testament is that you can know who the real God is because he keeps his promises. I believe that have come about that understanding by study and faith. (if you desire it)
you bring up personal stuff all the time but you don't always get it correct, if I recall properly. do I know you?
Stu you can possibly be right since artifacts are stolen all the time, but it still is possible that the artifact was recently dug up since new artifacts are constantly being discovered.
I accept your apology. oops I mean I accept your apology. Of course by posting in the largest font size possible, not adjusting it and lying about not knowing how to, the angry tone and the name calling, you mean to communicate no emphasis. I did no such thing. There is no reason to doubt that seal is 2,700 years old. What I dispute and what any rational person would dispute is the thread's title, claiming the seal "confirms [a] biblical account of Jerusalem". It does no such thing and it is perfectly clear why it doesn't.