Old Testament figure named on 2600-year-old tablet

Discussion in '2007 Archive' started by James_Newman, Jul 12, 2007.

  1. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22060312-2,00.html
     
  2. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I love these findings. It's almost like an "I told you so" to the world :)
     
  3. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yep, me too. :thumbs:

    Yet, there will be those who come on here to post and say they don't need archeological proof, the Bible is good enough for them. They miss the point entirely. Sad.
     
  4. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unfortunately, all to often those in the world ignore the implication of these finds. They don't wan't to have to give up their myth that the Bible is a fairy tale. :)
     
  5. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    So true. So many are afraid that they will have to give up something if they even acknowledge that God truly exists. (Perfect description of "slave to sin" )
     
  6. Analgesic

    Analgesic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Being fair to both sides...Yes, much of the world has unfairly and illogically dismissed the Bible's accuracy, however historical accuracy doesn't really do very much to prove spiritual accuracy.
     
  7. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    True, but it certainly puts the Bible in a different class than works like the Book of Mormon.
     
  8. Analgesic

    Analgesic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very much so.
     
  9. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree...they reject the truth (after being able to clearly see it). They are accountable.
     
  10. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know a few atheists who are experts on the Bible, and they accept the historical accuracy of it. They do realize that changing names from one language to another creates problems, therefore that doesn't mean that non-matching names is inaccurate. However, they still reject the idea of God.
     
  11. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK...who's name was on the tablet? C4K or Dr. Bob?


    (snicker)
     
  12. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    My ears were burning, but I didn't know why until I found this thread. I have to say I resemble that remark.

    While this is a welcome discovery (and apparently very rare), I suggest it would be wrong to make too much of it. Certainly the Telegraph was over the top when it said "Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament."

    Well, no. It may be exciting to see another bit of the Bible given some verification, but the fact that Jeremiah mentions a now-verified (by secular means) character no more validates the story contained in the Bible than does the mention of Pilate, Herod, Augustus, etc. validate the stories presented in the New Testament.

    I see that half of the 100,000 cuneiform tablets in the British Museum are yet to be published; there may be many more goodies in them. Time will tell.

    In the meantime, it's wise not to put too much faith in the discoveries of archeology. I hope we remember the boom - and bust - following the "discovery" of the ossuary of James and the stone supposedly mentioning Yehoash. I'm not suggesting that the latest find is a fake, only that such discoveries should not be embraced as proving more than they do.

    On a side note,
    Claude Mariottini, professor of Old Testament at Northern Baptist Seminary, concludes that if the new finding confirms the account in Jeremiah, then the NIV and the NLT got the translation of Jeremiah 39:3 right (the NET also gets an "A," although it's not on his list) based on the Septuagint reading, while the ESV, the NAB and KJV (and the NASB, also not on his list) get it wrong.

     
  13. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Hip-hip , Hurray for the NIV/TNIV , NLTse and NET ! They got it right !
     
  14. JFox1

    JFox1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    0
    I loved those archaeological findings!

    :thumbs: :godisgood: :jesus:
     

Share This Page

Loading...