Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised since the media in general plays to some level of political correctness. In this case, it’s a story with Biblical implications and despite the evidence, denial and skepticism are peppered throughout the account.
Setting: The Philistine city of Gath is being excavated. This is the same city from which Goliath came. The existence of the city backs up the Bible. The siege and destruction of the city back up the Bible. The design of the temple there backs up the architectural detail of how Samson brought down the structure–although not necessarily THAT same building. The names used in the city support a name similar to Goliath.
Despite all this, the anonymous writer persists in using words referring to Biblical accounts such as “improbably”, “according to”, “mentioned in”, and in reference to the kingdoms of David and Solomon, “if such a kingdom existed”. The article suggests that facts now being uncovered influenced the Biblical accounts—totally disregarding the possibility that the Biblical accounts could well be fact, even if written from a Hebrew perspective. For instance:
“One intriguing find at Gath is the remains of a large structure, possibly a temple, with two pillars. Maeir has suggested that this might have been a known design element in Philistine temple architecture when it was written into the Samson story.”
“Diggers at Gath have also found shards preserving names similar to Goliath — an Indo-European name, not a Semitic one of the kind that would have been used by the local Canaanites or Israelites. These finds show the Philistines indeed used such names and suggest that this detail, too, might be drawn from an accurate picture of their society.”
There is little know of the Philistines outside of what the Bible tells us, but that is being dismissed as fiction written around the hard facts of what archaeologist are digging up today. Those finds are then interpreted against the backdrop of the Biblical history with regard to OTHER kingdoms (“The razing of Gath at that time appears to have been the work of the Aramean king Hazael in 830 B.C., an incident mentioned in the Book of Kings.”) but the rest of the Bible is tossed aside.
How anyone can accept that Gath existed alongside the Biblical Jewish kingdoms, use the Biblical histories of other kingdoms such as the Arameans and Babylonians, and find archaeological evidence of temple construction and names—and then dismiss the Biblical account as fiction is beyond me.
The lead archaeologist doubts that they will find a giant skull with a hole in the center of the forehead. I hope they do! The sad thing is that even if such a skull is found, there will be full denial that it is the skull of Goliath. And even if they admit that fact, they will do scientific analysis on it and deny that the wound could have been caused by a stone propelled by a sling.
Man wants to deny God and will go to whatever lengths are necessary to put Him out of their lives. Well, at least until the going gets tough. That’s when it seems even the staunchest unbeliever calls on the name of God, whether in supplication or in curses.