Thoughts on this? Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament?

Question

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
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.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/11/ntablet111.xml

But will some say the Bible Still does not exsist?

Answer 1

No one is saying that the bible doesn't exist.

The bible may describe in it people and places of historical significance. So did the movie "Titanic" -- but that doesn't mean that Jack and Rose were real people, or that the "Heart of the Ocean" actually existed.

Just because ONE piece of information has some basis in fact, that doesn't automatically rubber-stamp ALL of it as absolute fact.

But seriously -- aren't they teaching you kids about logical fallacies and critical thinking in school anymore? This is basic stuff, here....

Answer 2

Why would anyone say the bible does not exist? Of course the bible exists it is a book and the best selling book of all time. Now the old testemant and new testemant are two seperate things and yes they both exist. The question you are posing tho is one of truth and on that the old and new must be seperated and would take far too long to disect than we have here. The short answer you are looking for is wheather the bible is the true word of god? That can not be answered as simply as you wish. Like I stated you would have to seperate the old and new testements and disect each part but in the end the results would be the same. The old testement is more of a historical record and can not be used to prove any of the new. Proof of the truth in the new testement lies in the heart of the beliver and proof that it is a work of man lies with the mind of the unbeliever.

Answer 3

I do not know how many times I have heard X "provides proof" for Bible, Old Testament, Jesus. One of the more interesting times was listening to a Seventh-day Adventist evangelist cite some Petra cuneiform tablet(s) claiming they proved the existence of one OT character or another. Researching the claim, I discovered that he cited examples that had been discredited for nearly a decade. The claims make headlines. The nuances or retractions get little coverage. This may be an important discovery. But the extent of its importance is yet to be seen.

Answer 4

The fact that historical details are in it doesn't make it completely true. If that were the criterion, The DaVinci Code is also true. If you look at the book of Esther (Ishtar), it is clear that it is merely a story about Babylonian gods (also Marduk/Mordecai) to keep a popular holiday on the post-Babylonian Jewish calendar. Existence and truth are two very different things. You can be brainwashed to ignore the difference.

Answer 5

Who says the Bible doesn't exist? Never heard that. I've heard plenty of people say the Bible isn't the word of God; that doesn't mean the Bible doesn't exist.

Being the Jews were in Babylon, it seems that a Babylonian name could turn up in the Tanakh (aka, Old Testament). What's so unusual about that?

Answer 6

Thank you for the information. I wonder how many finds are in store for us as the Bible is constantly substantiated in the face of those who constantly and religiously doubt it?

For those who hate God, they will never admit their faults unless the Spirit of God is drawing them to salvation. They will always doubt, as we have noticed in the Bible; even in the face of daily miracles. There has been no evolution of the thinking of man when God is brought up. No change at all.

I understand that the fact that the location of Ninhevah was not known before, and the Atheists of the day would often use that as an example of why the Bible wasn't true. But when Ninhevah was found, their issues changed and they were immediately and conveiniently unmindful of their past claim. Such is the way unbelievers think!

I have held a Cuneform tablet in my own hands. It was to be a gift to my pastor years ago. So I know that they are very substantial records; hardcopys of the past.

Thanks for the information!

Answer 7

"according to Jeremiah, was Nebuchadnezzar II's "chief officer" and was with him at the siege of Jerusalem in 587 BC"

Jeremiah must have been way ahead of his time to be using BC as a dating system.

Answer 8

Of course it exists. How ridiculous a question for you to ask.

The question is not of the book's existance. The problem people have with it is that it is a fairy tale book and people like you want to take it literally... but then you only want to take certain parts literally and pick & choose what parts you'll follow and what parts you'll ignore.

Nobody doubts the existance of the bible. It's the credibility of the bible that is in question.

Answer 9

Of course some will still say the Bible is false. The find appears to be evidence in support of the Bible at least.

Answer 10

I think it's interesting, but it doesn't do anything to verify or disprove the validity of the Bible as "truth" in its religious concepts. It helps verify the timetable and culture in which the Bible was written, places it in a historical context, but doesn't provide Christians with any type of "ammunition" for proving the existence of God.

Answer 11

I don't think anyone will question the idea that Bible exists. Obviously, it does, as does Darwin's "Origin of Species" and Dickens' "Bleak House."

What is questioned is whether the Bible has any connection to any particular divinity.