Archaeologists working near Tel es-Safi in southern Israel have found powerful evidence that a man called Goliath existed in that area about the time that the Old Testament indicates. This is especially significant because Tel es-Safi is believed to be the location of the ancient Philistine city of Gath which the Bible indicates to have been Goliath's home (1 Samuel 17:4)!

The inscription mentioning Goliath was found on a piece of pottery which is believed to have come from a bowl which would have been about 8 inches in diameter.

...It is the first clear evidence outside of the Bible that the story may be more than a legend. It also supports the Bible's depiction of life at the time the battle (between David and Goliath – my insert) was supposed to have occurred...

What this means is that at the time there were people there named Goliath ...It shows us that David and Goliath's story reflects the cultural reality of the time.” (Source: quotation from Professor Aren Maier of Bar-Ilan University, Israel from the article, Goliath: The Proof by Julie Wheldon, Daily Mail, 12th November, 2005. Daily Mail copyright).

The discovery of an inscription of the name of Goliath who was obviously a man of fame (why otherwise would his name be engraved on pottery?) in the area of Gath at about the time that the Bible indicates the existence of a famous giant called Goliath obviously does not – of itself – prove that this was the same famed 'Goliath' of 1 Samuel and yet it is still more evidence – and this continues to gradually mount up – that the Bible is accurate.

We have to remember that in the 19th century so-called “higher” Bible critics such as Julius Wellhausen, Herman Gunkel and many others made great play on the theory (a theory totally without evidence) that much of the Old Testament was purely imaginary myth which was mostly back-projected by much later writers; in arriving at their deconstructionist thesis, they assumed that much within the Old Testament was on the level of poetry at best, and folk-lore and legend stolen from surrounding peoples and cultures at worst. They never dreamed that any claimed historical events/personages could ever be substantiated from archaeology - and yet archaeology has now produced huge (and constantly mounting) evidence that formerly ridiculed and dismissed Old Testament events, stories and personalities really do fit in with what we now know about the Old Testament period in Israel.

So just as Darwin probably never dreamed that fossil evidence would increasingly undermine the theory of evolution (because evolution can never be witnessed in the fossil evidence, far more of which is now available compared to Darwin's day), even so the 19th century Old Testament deconstructionist “scholars” who arrogantly sought to make a name for themselves by attacking the credentials of the Bible, probably never dreamed that amounting evidence from archaeology and anthropology would so seriously undermine their theories less than 150 years after their deaths. The Old Testament really does reflect what we can now verify from other sources of the life and culture of the middle east.

Robin A. Brace, 2005.

You may also wish to read The Documentary Source Hypothesis: Does Anyone Still Believe It?