The Eunich and the crock of gold

[wishful thinker]

From to-day's paper:

Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament

The sound of unbridled joy seldom breaks the quiet of the British Museum's great Arched Room, which holds its collection of 130,000 Assyrian cuneiform tablets, dating back 5,000 years.

But Michael Jursa, a visiting professor from Vienna, let out such a cry last Thursday. He had made what has been called the most important find in Biblical archaeology for 100 years, a discovery that supports the view that the historical books of the Old Testament are based on fact.

Searching for Babylonian financial accounts among the tablets, Prof Jursa suddenly came across a name he half remembered - Nabu-sharrussu-ukin, described there in a hand 2,500 years old, as "the chief eunuch" of Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon.

Prof Jursa, an Assyriologist, checked the Old Testament and there in chapter 39 of the Book of Jeremiah, he found, spelled differently, the same name - Nebo-Sarsekim.
Nebo-Sarsekim, according to Jeremiah, was Nebuchadnezzar II's "chief officer" and was with him at the siege of Jerusalem in 587 BC, when the Babylonians overran the city.

The small tablet, the size of "a packet of 10 cigarettes" according to Irving Finkel, a British Museum expert, is a bill of receipt acknowledging Nabu-sharrussu-ukin's payment of 0.75 kg of gold to a temple in Babylon.

The tablet is dated to the 10th year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, 595BC, 12 years before the siege of Jerusalem.

Evidence from non-Biblical sources of people named in the Bible is not unknown, but Nabu-sharrussu-ukin would have been a relatively insignificant figure.

"This is a fantastic discovery, a world-class find," Dr Finkel said yesterday. "If Nebo-Sarsekim existed, which other lesser figures in the Old Testament existed? A throwaway detail in the Old Testament turns out to be accurate and true. I think that it means that the whole of the narrative [of Jeremiah] takes on a new kind of power."

Cuneiform is the oldest known form of writing and was commonly used in the Middle East between 3,200 BC and the second century AD. It was created by pressing a wedge-shaped instrument, usually a cut reed, into moist clay.

The full translation of the tablet reads: (Regarding) 1.5 minas (0.75 kg) of gold, the property of Nabu-sharrussu-ukin, the chief eunuch, which he sent via Arad-Banitu the eunuch to [the temple] Esangila: Arad-Banitu has delivered [it] to Esangila. In the presence of Bel-usat, son of Alpaya, the royal bodyguard, [and of] Nadin, son of Marduk-zer-ibni. Month XI, day 18, year 10 [of] Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

[pianistimo]

recently the inscription of 'pilate' was found as well.  and, references to king david.  these are all fairly recent.  https://www.bible-history.com/empires/pilate.html

surely, proof will mean something to christians even if it does not interest those who believe the bible fictional and want to destroy this evidence.  i hope that a lot of pictures and detail will be taken about each and every piece of evidence found and then put in many places.  not just the british museum. 

the recent pbs documentary (i think is playing tonight) on the egyptian wife of the pharoah who died in the red sea (at moses time) and her palace on/near the red sea - shows her interest in looking out over the sea and also recording what happened.  tomb robbers or contemporaries after her had stolen and defaced some of the statues of her - why?  because anything that related to the israelites - even wayyyy back in that time - by the egyptians - was repulsive to them.  therefore the rulers at various times attempted to destroy 'evidence.'   she was actually favorable to recording what happened as she was the daughter of the pharoah that raised moses himself.  so moses would have been her 'son.'  i think she was a believer - and allowed and helped moses to find the bones of joseph to take with him when he exited egypt.  she would have known of these things and helped him and the israelites take the 'spoil.'  also, her temple is different than the other egyptian ones.  there is more of a likeness of the future temple of solomon in her palace/tomb.

it is said that 'imhotep'  was possibly the name given to joseph (and that name was also discovered many times.  this name means worshipper of the God 'i am'  - or im (hotep = joseph)  by the time of moses 'tutmosis' or 'tuthmosis' is a very very close name.

[pianistimo]

the entire palace of the nebuchadnezzar of daniel's time was uncovered (including hanging gardens) by saddam hussein and being rebuilt until the iraq war.

https://www.pytlik.com/observe/daniel/setting/

bible literalists - such as myself - believe that the word 'babylon' came from the word babel and therefore an approximation of the city where nimrod built his ziggurat and where the whole earth used to have the same language until God 'confused' the languages and scattered the people. 

this is where dna tracing would be so helpful.  to prove where mankind migrated from.  this was a huge population center according to the bible.

[ahinton]

i'm confused

Can I have that in writing?! Oops - I just have...

not being a biblical scholar

You could have fooled all of us, all of the time...

surely, proof will mean something to christians even if it does not interest those who believe the bible fictional and want to destroy this evidence.

This discovery still leaves us far from incontrovertible and comprehensive "proof" of every Biblical text here, of course but, whilst I am not one who believes the Bible to be fictional - still less fiction deliberately parading as fact - I do accept that writings contained therein are a mixture of a number of things including but not limited to allusion, allegory, fantasy, poetical imagination, historical fact and correctly remembered, half-remembered and mis-remembered events and I am also aware, as I have stated previously, that the Bible as we now know it had no overall commissioning editor and comprises a series of volumes written by different authors over a considerable period of time; given the sheer age of these writings and the many kinds of change that have come about since (not least in terms of language and understanding), I do not even expect that the Bible should be taken as literal fact, no more, no less and it seems to me that to do so is to expect of it something that it was never intended to do or indeed capable of doing, for it is quite emphatically NOT "the word of God" but the colleted words of a number of individual writers whose grasp of history and whose chronicling and other literary virtues and otherwise embrace a whole world of contrasts.

That said, at least you are contributing something here that is pertinent to the thread topic!

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

i find it interesting that the ancient 'plain of shinar' still exists - as we call it mesopotamia.  aside from the ancient rivers euphrates and tigris.  exact names.  how can this be over such a long period of time -if it isn't tied to fact?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinar   

it is interesting to me that land features - such as a plain which would include the cities of akkad (which is mentioned in early world history books along with babel, and ur).  abraham lived in ur for a while.

ur is mentioned as being thorougly chaldean.  gen 11:31 '....ur of the chaldeans....'

[ahinton]

i find it interesting that the ancient 'plain of shinar' still exists - as we call it mesopotamia.  aside from the ancient rivers euphrates and tigris.  exact names.  how can this be over such a long period of time -if it isn't tied to fact?

Stop getting so defensive, Susan; I don't imagine that many people around these parts - even those who are atheists or other kinds of non-Christian - presume there to be not a single fact from cover to cover within the Bible.

The interest that you continue to express in the subject matter of this thread make it look increasingly less as though you are not a Biblical scholar, incidentally...

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

here is a recent find in jerusalem proving the existence of an actual palace of king david (proving some archeologists false - who doubted he was a king - and thought he was just a rogue shepherd). 

https://www.aish.com/jewishissues/jerusalem/Reclaiming_Biblical_Jerusalem.asp

i guess what i am getting at, alistair, is that i believe the bible to be completely true historically - with the only allegories being dreams, or parables.  the rest - the acts of God and the acts of man - together.  the acts of God people find unbelievable.  but, why?  because we don't understand it.

was watching another show (yes - too much pbs) in which a man went about to prove (for very hefty sum for the winner) that magic was really the ability to manipulate already existing powers here on earth and not metaphysical phenomenon that was 'spiritual.'  i'm not sure i would go that far - as i do believe there are 'spirits' and they can manifest themselves if they choose to (just as people believe 'haunted' houses, etc) - but in the same vein - also believe that angels can manifest themselves.  anyways - he said the majority of magicians could be 'undone' by discovering natural powers (electric, magnetic, whatever) that made the magic possible.

however, i believe in the 'latter days' - as daniel put it - there will be those who are extremely powerful in the 'arts.'  and will cause - fire to descend from heaven - etc.  the book of revelations mentions this.  rev 13: 13 'and he performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the presence of men.  and he decieves those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform ....'

i realize this is a divergence from the archeological things here - but history is a combo of backwards and forwards.  babylon was the center for magical and mysterious arts.  probably the center of the masonic traditions which are still held today.  even some of the gods and goddesses are mentioned in various ways  - and ishtar was the name of one of the gates that nebuchadnezzar created for his palace.  the fact that people would follow rulers because they thought they had 'god-like' powers isn't limited to ancient times.  people today will believe the same.  unless they are foretold.  the bible fortells that we should not be deceived.  if it were possible - we would be.  we are told to 'prove all things... hold fast to that which is true.'  so whether someone has 'powers of old' - basically the power of satan - it shouldn't sway us to follow what they say or do.

[ahinton]

i guess what i am getting at, alistair, is that i believe the bible to be completely true historically - with the only allegories being dreams, or parables.  the rest - the acts of God and the acts of man - together.  the acts of God people find unbelievable.  but, why?  because we don't understand it.

Even if you allow only for allegories as "dreams" as instanced in the Bible, you surely do not equate all such dreams with factual reality, do you? - or do you do so only in the case of those recounted in the Bible just because they are recounted there? That said, are you going to ignore, or do you diametrically disagree with, my assessment that the Bible as we understand it also embraces all those other elements that I mentioned earlier - i.e. allusion, fantasy, poetical imagination and half-remembered and mis-remembered events as well as historical fact? Furthermore, are you inflexibly unwilling to take on board and make due allowances for the inevitable consequences of the Bible as we know it being a multi-author text written without general editorial supervision and planning over a long period of time two thousand years ago in utterly different social, scientific, climatic, linguistic, etc. conditions to those that pertain today? - and, if so, why, when your aim appears to be to convince others as you have convinced yourself that the Bible contains only historical fact and factual prophecy? It just doesn't make sense - in fact, if you'll forgive me for saying so (and I doubt that you will), even the Bible as we know it seems to make more sense than you do here!

however, i believe in the 'latter days' - as daniel put it - there will be those who are extremely powerful in the 'arts.'

When do they start, then (or have they started already)? - and how many will there be? I ask only because the last bit suggests that I'd better stop schmooz'n with Sus'n and go do some more work...

and will cause - fire to descend from heaven - etc.  the book of revelations mentions this.  rev 13: 13 'and he performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the presence of men.  and he decieves those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform ....'

And now we are - or rather the book of Revelations is - back on imagery once again; what is it about you that puts you in such a stte of denial of the existence of poetic imagery such as this, just becuase it occurs in the Bible?

i realize this is a divergence from the archeological things here - but history is a combo of backwards and forwards.

We're not going to have any of that "Sibelius is Beethoven backwards" nonsense invading this thread, are we?...

babylon was the center for magical and mysterious arts.  probably the center of the masonic traditions which are still held today.  even some of the gods and goddesses are mentioned in various ways  - and ishtar was the name of one of the gates that nebuchadnezzar created for his palace.  the fact that people would follow rulers because they thought they had 'god-like' powers isn't limited to ancient times.  people today will believe the same.  unless they are foretold.  the bible fortells that we should not be deceived.  if it were possible - we would be.  we are told to 'prove all things... hold fast to that which is true.'  so whether someone has 'powers of old' - basically the power of satan - it shouldn't sway us to follow what they say or do.

Whilst I am certainly not suggesting that history is something from which things cannot or should not ever be learnt, I do get the frequent impression that you even choose to interpret some of what may well be historical fact in the Bible as though the sole or principal purpose of its presentation there is as a mere backdrop for some kind of prophecy to be extrapolated therefrom by readers such as yourself; this seems to me a shame, since I get the impression that you are actually getting rather less out the Bible than you might otherwise do, due both to this way of reading it and the literal interpretations that you so eagerly put upon it.

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

sorry if i unload too much.  i came back to wipe half of it out - as probably ,as you say - not relevant to the topic of archeology per se. 

[ahinton]

sorry if i unload too much.  i came back to wipe half of it out - as probably ,as you say - not relevant to the topic of archeology per se.

I'm not seeking your apology - nor is it so much a case of "unloading" per se; it's just that you seem to have an almost obsessive compulsion to drag religious material in general and Biblical and Christian material in particular into so very many non-specifically musical topics that get aired in this part of the forum and this gets as tiresome to read as it is nauseatingly predictable. Why do you feel that you must keep doing this, Susan? I'm just trying to understand, that's all. It's more than enough to provide a distinct impression that Susan is always in the missionary position...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

surely, proof will mean something to christians even if it does not interest those who believe the bible fictional and want to destroy this evidence. 

Proof that people existed does not equate to proof of what happened, which is surely more important.

Thal