The Muslims try to discount the Jewish connection to Jerusalem, the capital of the Jewish nation. And Ha'Shem keeps providing reminder after reminder of the strong, enduring, very real connection the Jews have with their capital of Jerusalem and with all Yisrael.

then you must be a jewish lady of 2000 years old....and still going strong.

one of the end of a ribbon which was through the collar to be pulled and be tight around the neck one of my grand mothers had lost it while she was washing her face the other one was with me

With no writing, engraving or any insignia, this was just a bell. It may show that 2000 years ago, someone was negligent but who they were will probably never be known. Was he/she Jewish, a Canaanite, a traveler, a wealthy Roman or Greek? The archaelogists have no idea and idiots speculating on the ethnicity of the former owner as 'proof' have frostbitten brains.

Historians thought the Bible could not have been true because it referred to Hittites, which of course did not exist. Then they found extensive evidence of the Hittite civilization. Biblical mention of the bells at the hem of the High Priest's robe would lead one to expect some evidence thereof. Seeing a bell from the time and place where the Scripture indicates it should be expected is ... expected. The only people with a vested interest in denying the connection between Scripture and evidence would be anti-Semites who would rather believe the Muslim invented narrative than Scripture which is confirmed by over a millennium of archaeological evidence. For more information, please see bib dash arch dot org, the website of the Biblical Archaeology Review, and click on the article. You see, not only idiots but some of the foremost scientific minds on this planet and the anti-Israel Associated Press see the possibility of a connection. I would recommend you take a few seconds for research before posting. This only took me one Google search and clicking on 2 sequential links, about 30 seconds. 30 seconds is pretty cheap to avoid finding yourself disagreeing with both the Associated Press and the scientists whose job it is to be knowledgeable about the subject.

Historians thought the Bible could not have been true because it referred to Hittites, which of course did not exist. Then they found extensive evidence of the Hittite civilization. Biblical mention of the bells at the hem of the High Priest's robe would lead one to expect some evidence thereof. Seeing a bell from the time and place where the Scripture indicates it should be expected is ... expected. The only people with a vested interest in denying the connection between Scripture and evidence would be anti-Semites who would rather believe the Muslim invented narrative than Scripture which is confirmed by over a millennium of archaeological evidence. For more information, please see bib dash arch dot org, the website of the Biblical Archaeology Review, and click on the article. You see, not only idiots but some of the foremost scientific minds on this planet and even the anti-Israel Associated Press see the possibility of a connection here. Might I suggest a little cursory research before posting next time. That way you won't embarrass yourself again.

A bell is a bell when the bats are ringing it your belfry

The 'possibility of a connection' is not the PROOF of a connection. In other words, the bell found is just a bell. The inferences you draw are not only unsupported by the 'facts' you offer, but merely your fantasy.

The Inferences I draw are the _entire reason for the article_ published in Biblical Archeology Review. If such an inference was invalid, the article would have no place in the professional journal. You can say that there is a strong enough possibility that the bell belonged to a Jewish temple priest for the find to be remarkable to archaeologists, and I will agree with you. But if you say the find is negligible, I will invite you to argue that in the professional journal. I have better things to do than to feed trolls. In fact, you will likely find that BAR does as well.

A thing like this is much unsual. If it was common, we would have found much more. If it was canaanite or something else, we would have found more elsewhere. But no. We have found only one, which probably means there never was a lot of them. And surprisingly, they correspond to the bible description of some bells and to no other description or culture. And it has been found in Ir David. Right next to where thoses bells are supposed to have been used. So not an absolute proof, but saying that it's "just a bell" is even worse.

Your writings (ahem) remind me of Capt. Queeg in the Caine Muntiny Court Martial, it seem that you also have marbles rattling around in your overhead The fact is, was and will be, you simply are rambling on about what you know nothing of In your case, you're a real ding a ling