Again, I feel it is important to refute your claim that 'no evidence
whatsoever' exists regarding David as having been a real person of importance.
Obviously you have either overlooked such evidence or, as is your right, have chosen to discount it entirely.
The following is an excerpt from this website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A9914268 Quote:Despite the accounts of David's life and exploits as recorded in the Bible, many scholars have doubted that King David actually existed.
However, in 1868 an inscribed basalt stone, dating from the 9th Century BC - known as the Moabite Stone2 or the Mesha Stela - was discovered at Dibon, Jordan; an ancient city east of the Dead Sea, by FA Klein, a German missionary. The stone was 1.1m high and 0.6m in breadth and in thickness, rounded at the top. It consisted of thirty-four lines, written in the ancient Hebrew alphabet, a script closely related to Phoenician; and was set up by Mesha3 at Dan as a record and memorial of his victories.
The stone was, unfortunately, much fragmented but in 1993 a French scholar, Andre Lemaire, who had spent seven years piecing it all together, discovered the words 'House of David'. Line 31 of the Moabite Stone contains the words '...the sheep of the land. And the house (of Da)vid dwelt in Horonen'. This was reported in Biblical Archaeology Review, May-June, 1994. and created such a sensation that it was also reported on the front page of The New York Times. This inscription showed that Israel and Judah were important kingdoms in the 9th Century BC, and refuted the positions of those scholars who claimed that these were never nations of any significance, and even disputed that David had ever been at the head of a united monarchy.
A report in Biblical Archaeology Review, March-April 1994, states:
Avraham Biran and his team of archaeologists found a remarkable inscription from the 9th Century BC that refers to the 'House of David' and to the 'King of Israel'. This is the first time that the name David has been found in any inscription outside the Bible. That the inscription refers not simply to David but to the 'House of David', the dynasty of the great Israelite king, is even more remarkable.
There are numerous sources as to the veracity of these claims and many other biblical accounts.
Here is but a single example:
http://www.probe.org/content/view/31/77/I respect your opinion Loki, however, based on the volume of evidence that exists as a matter of open and public record, I find that the existence of David, along with an impressive number of other characters and events, all a matter of historical Bible record, are also in agreement with Archaeological findings.
In the end, no matter one's perspective.....Loki, you are correct. Men are not infallible. And one must become accustomed to taking another's word as the basis for making many an important decision.
May we all choose wisely that which we choose to incorporate each, into his or her personal character, as gleaned from the words of others....
Nay, even ourselves.
TS
Pages: 
Is it real? David and Goliath (Read 147740 times)
