Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament
By Nigel Reynolds, Arts CorrespondentLast Updated: 2:14am BST 13/07/2007
Have your say
Read comments
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. | |  | This fragment is a receipt for payment made by a figure in the Old Testament
|
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. Publishers wishing to reproduce photographs on this page should phone 44 (0) 0207 931 2921 or e-mail syndication@telegraph.co.uk |
Have your say
Comments
I do not need proof or confirmation to know that GOD'S WORD is true from beginning to end. Hebrews 11:1 says "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
The Holy Bible is the inspired and perfect Word of GOD. I can't prove it but I know it because HE lives in my heart. And one day, possibly, very soon, HE is sending HIS son Jesus Christ (my Lord and Saviour) to take those of us who have put their faith and trust in HIM and HIS perfect sacrifice home to be with Him.
Posted by Tom Gothard Jr on July 12, 2007 11:29 PM
Report this comment
The find is very interesting to say the least. What's even more interesting to me are the range of responses here regarding the find. While the table gives insight to the Bible and Biblical history, many of these responses give insight into human psychology. I wonder which teaches us more about God.
Posted by Jennifer on July 12, 2007 10:42 PM
Report this comment
Everything from that time on is right historically. To see why read "Who Wrote The Bible." Simple reason is that it was after the Babylonian captivity that the books we have, were written (assembled). Before that it's spotty. So to infer that "the Bible" is accurate because everything after a point is accurate, is pretty silly. Especially when THAT POINT in time is when the 5 books were constructed. :-)
Posted by Allen on July 12, 2007 10:31 PM
Report this comment
A) The name is not the same they have spelt it wrong.
B) Chief officer of a kind does not sound that unimportant to me.
All this proves is the lengths some people will go to in the search for thier "proof".
This is no more proof that the bible is real than it is proof that the simpsons is real because they mention blair being primeminister
Posted by Sarah on July 12, 2007 10:24 PM
Report this comment
I totally agree with Dan Gentry's comments. The New Testament did not do away with the Old Testament Laws. The New Testament only re-enforced the Old Testament Laws. YAHSHUA himself stated, that he did not come to do away with the laws, but to strengthen them. Yahweh is now looking for the circumcism of the heart, where he will write his (original) laws in the hearts of the true believers. Only then, will we be able to worship our True Elohim and Spirit and in Truth.
Job well done, Dan. Keep studying and learning the truth. Keep the faith, and when Yahshua returns, he will smile upon you and your true belief in Him and in the Father Yahweh.
Thank you
Olga D'Alessanddro,
Lewes, Delaware 19958
Posted by Olga DAlessandro on July 12, 2007 10:19 PM
Report this comment
Interesting. So, the tablet mentions someone and their position the same as in the Bible. That doesn't prove that every word in the Bible is a fact. It is a historical fact that Jeremiah was begun around 585 BCE and received its completion about 525-530 BCE. It's also pretty much a given that Jeremiah was in the court of Nebuchednezzar and obviously not doing too badly. The name could have easily been injected during the last writing which was obviously done by one of Jeremiah's followers. No one knows precisely when or who wrote what.
Posted by Alex on July 12, 2007 8:40 PM
Report this comment
marti said: "...and Jesus made a new covenant with all people, doing away with the OLD LAW and requirements..."
FALSEHOOD. Jesus Christ made the 'New Covenant' with the flesh-and-blood offspring of ancient Israel (not "Jews" as they are known today) -- HEBREWS 8:8-13. Plain as the nose on my face. And, NO, He didn't destroy the 'Law of Moses,' but instead, planted the Spirit to do it, in the hearts and minds of His followers. The Law didn't change, or disappear, only our relation to YHVH, when we repent.
Posted by Dan Gentry on July 12, 2007 8:28 PM
Report this comment
"However there is no sign yet of any proof for the genesis story so I'll stick with with physics for the time being."
But you are wrong! There is scientific proof for the genesis story of an instant creation. You can read about it at the following link:
link
Posted by Daryl on July 12, 2007 8:11 PM
Report this comment
In reply to Stephen....and how many of those Ashkenazi atheists inhabiting Palestine are genetically Semites, eh? If the Israeli people don't genetically belong in Palestine, they are no different from your hypothetical "roving English seamen" and are engaging in the same colonial misconduct. Don't throw rocks, Mr. Glass House.
Posted by Grace on July 12, 2007 7:38 PM
Report this comment
I have read about this find, and it only encourages me more. Not that I needed any proof that the Bible is true, but that maybe somewhere, somehow, someway, an un-believer will question and start believing that God does exist. I don't need anyone to tell me that He exists or that the Bible is true because I KNOW what HE has done for me in my personal life. He has set me free from opression, and healed my body from breast cancer. He has healed my husband of pancreatitis. He has set my son and daughter free from sin!! I don't need anyone or any thing to tell me God is real, but thanks for the information. I think it's great!! Don't believe the enemy (lucifer, satan, whatever he wants to call himself) The Bible (King James Version) says he is a liar and the father of lies. JOhn 8:44
Posted by henri on July 12, 2007 7:32 PM
Report this comment
Alright another homerun for the people of the one and true living of god. This is truely the end times. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. And may the LORD bless each and everyone of you. Bye the way ISRAEL has never started a war they have always been on the defensive. To protect there people, they have no plans of attacking anyone, and have never occupied land that did not belong to them. They are the only country with a tile deed that dates back more than 2500 years. Purchased by King David. for 60 sheckles of gold and 20 sheckles of silver. amen
Posted by Vincent Panzarino on July 12, 2007 7:30 PM
Report this comment
Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand!!! only if you accept Jesus and be born again can you enter heaven, confess with your mouth, and with your heart and you will be saved...
Posted by paragon on July 12, 2007 7:26 PM
Report this comment
interesting, but where is the tax return with the line item for donations?
the comments are interesting - seems the Bible always has had a higher threshold of historical evidence required than other written works - the theological relationship drives this to be sure - if I believe the historical accuracy of the Bible it now challenges me to assess the theological implications - easier to dismiss the book as historically insignificant first and not get to the personal implications.
Posted by Lee Long on July 12, 2007 6:31 PM
Report this comment
God doesn't need us to debate for Him. The New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old Testament and Jesus made a new covenant with all people, doing away with the OLD LAW and requirements. Most people just don't believe you can get something for nothing. Forgiveness and eternal life; Unconditional love. That's the free gift of God thru Jesus Christ.
Posted by marti on July 12, 2007 6:12 PM
Report this comment
So far, many of you seem to be misunderstanding the nature of the evidence. The Bible -- from Genesis to Revelation -- is self-authenticating in so many ways that what it says can be taken as axiomatic. Finds like this tablet confirm, not "prove", its validity. Such finds are merely what one should expect. They're great to have, but no amount of such "proofs" will convince the skeptic, and no "proofs" of this kind are necessary to those who understand the internal evidence. But attempts to twist the literature related to the Old Testament, as Zecharia Sitchin does, can be ignored; such people only show their ignorance and prejudice. As for the name of this eunuch, Jeremiah has it right -- as a Hebrew transliteration of Babylonian, accurately representing the common method of the time. Apparently Jeremiah abbreviates the name too, leaving off the *Nebo (Nabu)*; he renders the name as *Sarsekhim Rav-Sarim (Chief of the Princes)*. This too was a common practice; people often had multiple aliases in those days, even in the same official records.
Posted by John Wheeler on July 12, 2007 5:56 PM
Report this comment
Before people become too excited, let’s
examine more carefully the implications of this
tablet. I can read cuneiform, and I know Dr.
Irving Finkel, who is an excellent scholar.
This tablet an important find, but it does
not have the more exaggerated biblical
fundamentalist implications that are being
assigned to it by some.
First, it is a mistake to assume that because
one biblical claim mentioned in the Bible is
confirmed by an independent source, then ALL
claims in the Bible are true. This tablet certainly
would confirm nothing about the supernatural
claims in the Bible.
Second, if one is going to assume that
everything is true in the Bible because one claim
is proven true, then one must apply this rationale
to all religions, including the Babylonian
religion.
After all, we could just reverse this rationale and
say that the Babylonian records are confirmed by
the biblical records, and so Babylonian claims
about the supernatural are correct.
Third, we are not completely sure that
“Nabu-sharrusu-ukin, the chief eunuch” is the
very same official mentioned in Jeremiah 39:3,
where the name is vocalized (in English
transcription) as Sarsechim (or Sarsekim).
But note that Sarsekim lacks the “Nabu”
part which we would expect in other names
(“Nebu-chadnezzar”) has it. Likewise, Nebu-
zaradan (2 Kings 25:8-11) retains the “Nebu”
part of the name, which refers to the god, Nabu
(or Nebo).
The issue is further complicated because in
Jeremiah 39:13 “The Rabsaris” (“the Chief
Eunuch”) is named Nebushazban, which is a
different name deriving perhaps from the
Babylonian Nebu-shuzibanni (= “Nabu deliver
me”).
Because of these problems, it has been
proposed that the name prior to Sarsekim in
Jeremiah 39:3 be redivided so that the “nebo” of
“Samgar-nebo” be joined with Sarsekim, which
would now yield Nebo-Sarsekim, a name closer
to the name found on the British Museum tablet.
Professor Michael Jursa, therefore, opted for
a re-division of the Hebrew text to get Nebo-
Sarsekim (so does the NIV, but not the KJV or
RSV).
However, this would mean that the biblical
text (or at least the standard Masoretic edition of
the Hebrew text) was WRONG in how it
transcribed the Babylonian name, or that
the text has been corrupted. It would mean that
we had to use Babylonian texts to CORRECT the
biblical mangling of the Babylonian name. That
should not inspire much confidence that biblical
scribes were always accurate.
Note also that the New American Bible
omits Sarsechim altogether in Jeremiah 39:3, and
substitutes Nebushazban (from Jeremiah 39:13).
So now one has to be specific as to WHICH
VERSION of “the Bible” one believes is
“confirmed.” The NAB would be proven wrong by
this tablet.
So, yes, thank goodness for Mesopotamian
texts which have helped us immensely to
understand how mythological and how textually
corrupted biblical texts can be.
Posted by Dr. Hector Avalos on July 12, 2007 5:25 PM
Report this comment
I don't see why we should be particularly surprised, I have always assumed that many parts of this book must be based in real history.
However there is no sign yet of any proof for the genesis story so I'll stick with with physics for the time being.
Posted by cuffleyburgers on July 12, 2007 4:55 PM
Report this comment
Amazing that truth should be verified by rubbish ?...seems rubbish to me...
Posted by H E Torrance on July 12, 2007 4:30 PM
Report this comment
Next time someone says that Israel has no right
to be in their own land they can now take a
running jump.
The Jewish people have been fighting invaders to
their land for 5000 years but it seems to some,
like British unions they are occupiers. The
Jewish people have had a presence in that land
since the beginning of history as we know it.
However the theft and colonization of Australia,
New Zealand, Canada, and of course The
Falklands, by roving English seamen is perfectly
legitimate because........
The arrogance of it is staggering. Put your own
houses in order and then preach to the Jews.
Posted by Stephen on July 12, 2007 4:25 PM
Report this comment
This is wonderful news, but not surprising. There are those who will say this means nothing. God has a way of letting Himself be known. I'll be very surprised if this makes news in the US. The once proud nation based on Christian principles has turned it's back on it's true heritage. I bet this story doesn't make it on the mainstream media. At best, it will be in some small town newspaper on the last page. What a shame for such an important find!
Posted by Kathleen, California USA on July 12, 2007 4:15 PM
Report this comment
If the Bible couldn't even get his name right, why should we believe any of it?
Posted by Thomas Mc on July 12, 2007 4:05 PM
Report this comment
So, if it is factually correct, maybe the Bible is normatively correct. Maybe God really is the pathologically wrathful and jealous deity depicted in the Old Testament, and we should give up football (no touching pig skin-Lev.11:6-8), reinstate slavery (Lev.25:44), and stone to death our disobedient sons (Deut.21:18-21). Oh, and of course we should repent of representative government and return to bronze-age theocracy, with W filling in as the new Moses and Cheney as Aaron.
What to make of this artifact, the Bible?
"Do unto others...". The rest, as the rabbi said, is commentary.
Posted by R. U. Thinking on July 12, 2007 4:01 PM
Report this comment
Ha! It only proves that there was a Nebuchadnezzar. Why they make a big deal about this is so they can turn one little rather insignificant artifact that collaborates one character (ONE character) in the Old Testament into a sweeping generalization that the whole book (or, rather 39 books, but who's counting?) is accurate.
Unmentioned in this article is that the entire Jewish "history" prior to the Babylonian captivity is fiction. Or, did I let the old Masonic secret out of the bag?
Posted by Lucifer on July 12, 2007 3:28 PM
Report this comment
Archeology keeps finding that the Old Testament is valid. I wonder how much third party evidence needs to be found to validate the Old Testament's account of history for Archeologists?
Posted by Jeff Bristow on July 12, 2007 3:16 PM
Report this comment
To find the real thruth of the Old testament you only has to read what Zecharia Sitchin has found since 1975 and was persecuted for his translations until now but failed to cover-up the real story, jews just adapted what the old summerians already have has stories like the flood and Noah that really was arab and called Upnapishtim and other things that will astonish your brain.
Just buy books of Sitchin at Amazon.com and you will see the Truth.
Posted by ADOLFO ARAYA on July 12, 2007 1:42 PM
Report this comment
Post a comment
Reader figures are a new battleground for freesheets. |  | Should tourists think twice before booking a Nile cruise? | | Beware of the revealing science on your doorstep. | | The ICA is having a retrospective of Swedish Erotica. |
