The current issue of National Geographic features the conflict between scholars who believe they have found a lot of evidence for David and his biblical empire and those who do not. Few doubt David existed, but how accurate is the Bible? It is an instructive read seeing scholars question each other’s bias. One side claims the other looks for David in the littlest of finds (but one guy uses a “gut feeling” to dismiss a David find). The other side claims the anti-Davids are looking for an unreasonable standard of evidence as if they need fully intact palaces and cities.
Considering that few doubt David’s existence, the thinking person might ask: Why is archaeology in this region so difficult? Could it be that the area was repeatedly overrun and attacked by foreign armies? Cities built on top of cities? The article, and some of the scholars, seem to forget the history of the region they work in.
And on 
Darrick Dean 