Viggen Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 The British Museum has hailed a discovery within a modest clay tablet in its collection as a breakthrough for biblical archaeology - dramatic proof of the accuracy of the Old Testament. The cuneiform inscription in a tablet dating from 595BC has been deciphered for the first time - revealing a reference to an official at the court of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, that proves the historical existence of a figure mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah. This is rare evidence in a non-biblical source of a real person, other than kings, featured in the Bible. full article at The Australian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Salve, V! An interesting link. I suppose the next step would be the validation of this "Nebo-Sarsekim", as he can always be a homonym. Anyway, I think a lot of us admited that "the Biblical story is not altogether invented" for a long time before reading this article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Caelius Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 I think a lot of us admited that "the Biblical story is not altogether invented" for a long time before reading this article. On the other hand, a mere "reference to an official at the court of Nebuchadnezzar," even if it should be the same person mentioned in the OT, is a considerably long leap from parting the seas, and is hardly "dramatic proof of the accuracy of the Old Testament" as the article claims. Consider: "The tablet names a Babylonian officer called Nebo-Sarsekim, who according to Jeremiah xxxix was present in 587BC when Nebuchadnezzar "marched against Jerusalem with his whole army and laid siege to it"." And: "The cuneiform inscription records how Nebo-Sarsekim lavished a gift of gold on the Temple of Esangila in the fabled city of Babylon..." Were the Babylonians like snowflakes, no two of them having the same name? Were sons never named after fathers or grandfathers? How do we know that the author of Jeremiah didn't need a Babylonian name for his story, heard "Nebo-Sarsekim" and liked it? Even if it's the same person, so what? All it does is provide evidence (evidence, not proof) that the Bible isn't a complete fabrication. I just don't see the logical progression from one document to the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 quote] I just don't see the logical progression from one document to the other. Salve, MC! I totally agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.