>>And no, I'm not pushing anything other than rationalism<<

I disagree. This site is from some biblical group claiming no religious affiliation when it is clear they composed of Christians and Jews and the organization is in North Carolina, not exactly a fount of freethought there.

Even if we accept that "house of David" is written on something does that mean David existed? No.

Another relic was supposed to be from Herod's temple but we read it carefully and discover it was "attributed" to these ruins.

Another refers to Caiaphas and tells us helpfully that he presided at the trial of Jesus, ergo the gospel story must be true. As though because someone was named Caiaphas that automatically validates the story. And even if it was the name of a high priest who fulfilled this office in the times attributed to this Jesus does that mean there really was a trial and he presided over it?

This is the same old tired fundie garbage that proves nothing at all.