| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
13 Jul 2007 04:58:50 PM |
| Object: |
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1863897/posts
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 7-10-2007 | Nigel Reynolds
Posted on 07/10/2007 5:48:08 PM PDT by blam
Tiny tablet provides proof for Old Testament
By Nigel Reynolds, Arts Correspondent
Last Updated: 7:33pm BST 10/07/2007
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.
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
13 Jul 2007 05:11:04 PM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com> wrote:
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
Like hell it does.
It's all completely circular.
They found a name that is SIMILAR to one in the bible.
So, if you ASSUME that the bible is historically accurate,
you can then assume that the names aren't just similar,
but the exact same name spelled differently.
But in order for you to do all that you have to claim that
the historical accuracy of the bible is ALREADY proven.
So, how could this find "Prove" the bible when, according
to your position, the bible has long since been proven?
According to this story, the bible "Proves" it is the same
name, AND finding the same name proves the bible...
Again: This is circular.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L.T. David" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
13 Jul 2007 06:16:42 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184364664.060845.87670@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com> wrote:
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
Like hell it does.
It's all completely circular.
They found a name that is SIMILAR to one in the bible.
So, if you ASSUME that the bible is historically accurate,
you can then assume that the names aren't just similar,
but the exact same name spelled differently.
But in order for you to do all that you have to claim that
the historical accuracy of the bible is ALREADY proven.
So, how could this find "Prove" the bible when, according
to your position, the bible has long since been proven?
According to this story, the bible "Proves" it is the same
name, AND finding the same name proves the bible...
Again: This is circular.
Good news, bad news. The bad news is that Jeremiah 39:3-14 does not appear
in the Septuagint and wasn't found in cave 4 at Qumran in the Masoretic
Hebrew version. Who added those verses in and when?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
14 Jul 2007 10:13:19 AM |
|
|
L.T. David wrote:
"JTEM" <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184364664.060845.87670@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com> wrote:
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
Like hell it does.
It's all completely circular.
They found a name that is SIMILAR to one in the bible.
So, if you ASSUME that the bible is historically accurate,
you can then assume that the names aren't just similar,
but the exact same name spelled differently.
But in order for you to do all that you have to claim that
the historical accuracy of the bible is ALREADY proven.
So, how could this find "Prove" the bible when, according
to your position, the bible has long since been proven?
According to this story, the bible "Proves" it is the same
name, AND finding the same name proves the bible...
Again: This is circular.
Good news, bad news. The bad news is that Jeremiah 39:3-14 does not appear
in the Septuagint and wasn't found in cave 4 at Qumran in the Masoretic
Hebrew version. Who added those verses in and when?
The Hebrew Bible was still a work in progress in Umayyad Spain in the
/ninth/ century.
--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
14 Jul 2007 01:00:34 AM |
|
|
In message <1184364664.060845.87670@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
It's all completely circular.
Actually, the tablet is rectangular. The froth dribbling from your mouth is
obscuring your vision and making it appear circular.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
15 Jul 2007 05:00:31 AM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <1184364664.060845.87670@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
It's all completely circular.
Actually, the tablet is rectangular. The froth dribbling from your mouth is
obscuring your vision and making it appear circular.
Ken Down
I haven't taken any tablets for years.
--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
15 Jul 2007 02:16:07 PM |
|
|
In message <3fmmi.34322$iE5.22689@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
Martin Edwards <big_mart_98@yahoo.com> wrote:
It's all completely circular.
Actually, the tablet is rectangular. The froth dribbling from your mouth is
obscuring your vision and making it appear circular.
I haven't taken any tablets for years.
That explains a lot.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
15 Jul 2007 06:59:43 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:00:31 GMT, Martin Edwards
<big_mart_98@yahoo.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <1184364664.060845.87670@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
It's all completely circular.
Actually, the tablet is rectangular. The froth dribbling from your mouth is
obscuring your vision and making it appear circular.
Ken Down
I haven't taken any tablets for years.
Priests these days prefer administration via suppository anyway.
If you can't be a dirty old man, what is the point of being an old man?
Through a jaundiced eye darkly--rheum with a view.
The Squeeky Wheel
http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
13 Jul 2007 08:31:18 PM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com> wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1863897/posts
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
Prof Jursa, an Assyriologist, checked the Old Testament
and there in chapter 39 of the Book of Jeremiah, he found,
spelled differently, the samename- Nebo-Sarsekim.
Here you go:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jeremiah%2039;&version=9;
Which line, exactly?
Because, as someone pointed out, the name isn't in the bible.
The story is 100% fabricated. It's a lie. Not one word of the
story is true.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
17 Jul 2007 12:02:46 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:31:18 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com> wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1863897/posts
Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament
Prof Jursa, an Assyriologist, checked the Old Testament
and there in chapter 39 of the Book of Jeremiah, he found,
spelled differently, the samename- Nebo-Sarsekim.
Here you go:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jeremiah%2039;&version=9;
Which line, exactly?
Because, as someone pointed out, the name isn't in the bible.
The story is 100% fabricated. It's a lie. Not one word of the
story is true.
And this is a shock, coming from a lying Xtian?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
23 Jul 2007 12:17:26 AM |
|
|
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.
Whose chief eunuch was he? There is no indication he belonged to or worked for
any person.
All this is is a receipt the deliveryman can take back to the owner to show he
delivered it. There are two witnesses to the delivery and the date of delivery.
The delivery man is covered and the temple cannot come back and say they were
short changed.
--
Reference to scholars is meaningless without further definition else you
have to consider the opinions of National Merit Scholars are authoritative.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3828
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Old Testament http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/ot.phtml a6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
23 Jul 2007 12:40:38 PM |
|
|
In message <46a43aed$0$16588$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whose chief eunuch was he? There is no indication he belonged to or worked for
any person.
Of course there is: if he didn't work for anyone, he would just be *a*
eunuch; the fact that he is *chief* eunuch shows that he was employed - and
the only employers were the top nobles and the king.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
24 Jul 2007 10:24:02 PM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a43aed$0$16588$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whose chief eunuch was he? There is no indication he belonged to or worked for
any person.
Of course there is: if he didn't work for anyone, he would just be *a*
eunuch; the fact that he is *chief* eunuch shows that he was employed - and
the only employers were the top nobles and the king.
Chief Eunuch of the king would be worth noting. The CE of some other major
family would be worth noting. That no one is named implies he was the CE of the
temple that is mentioned as that is the only employer not worth mentioning to
further identify him. It is why we would not bother to mention which congress
sends a bill to the president of the US for signing.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
--
One finger is all a real American needs.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3838
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
commentary http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/running.phtml a5
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
25 Jul 2007 01:00:33 AM |
|
|
In message <46a6cbce$0$4722$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Chief Eunuch of the king would be worth noting.
Exactly - so when we find a chief eunuch mentioned in a tablet and a chief
eunuch with the same name and living at the same time mentioned in the
Bible, we conclude that they are the same person.
Not provable, but entirely reasonable.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
25 Jul 2007 09:48:12 PM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a6cbce$0$4722$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Chief Eunuch of the king would be worth noting. The CE of some
other major family would be worth noting. That no one is named implies
he was the CE of the temple that is mentioned as that is the only
employer not worth mentioning to further identify him. It is why we
would not bother to mention which congress sends a bill to the president
of the US for signing.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
Exactly - so when we find a chief eunuch mentioned in a tablet and a chief
eunuch with the same name and living at the same time mentioned in the
Bible, we conclude that they are the same person.
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Not provable, but entirely reasonable.
So which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
--
The Iraqi government has not prosecuted a single Iraqi for killing American
troops. At least the government supports its citizens.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3832
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
antisemitism http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ a1
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
26 Jul 2007 12:49:39 AM |
|
|
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
26 Jul 2007 10:01:21 PM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
--
An entire cool summer is trumped by a warm day in January if you are a
global melter.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3836
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
antisemitism http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ a1
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
27 Jul 2007 02:55:24 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
27 Jul 2007 10:06:36 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
--
Watch Frank Capra's "Why We Fight." If my parents and grandparents took that
crap seriously, I was right as a teenager. They were stupid.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3826
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Larry Shiff http://www.giwersworld.org/computers/newsagent.phtml a8
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
28 Jul 2007 03:18:45 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:06:36 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
A Lectern is a support for a book.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
28 Jul 2007 05:46:42 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:06:36 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
A Lectern is a support for a book.
I have come up against this one time and time again, not just with Matt.
Some parts of the Anglophone world find a lot of humour in the play
between figurative and literal language, with others it simply doesn't
register. I can't count the times I've thought I cracked a joke and
elicited a line by line refutation.
--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
28 Jul 2007 09:06:01 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:06:36 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
A Lectern is a support for a book.
Which museum exhibits a lectern designed for the OT?
--
England suffered Irish terrorism for a century but not once did England
resort to the draconian measures of the US since 9/11.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3830
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
environmentalism http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a9
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Edwards" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
29 Jul 2007 05:44:49 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:06:36 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at
the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
A Lectern is a support for a book.
Which museum exhibits a lectern designed for the OT?
See what I mean?
--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
29 Jul 2007 02:44:17 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:06:01 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:06:36 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:01:21 -0400, Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a8280c$0$4728$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Of course I can read - and when I see the name Matt the Pratt at the top of
a post I know automatically that what follows is a lie.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
The Lectern?
I don't get the joke.
A Lectern is a support for a book.
Which museum exhibits a lectern designed for the OT?
The Jewish Historical Museum
Nieuwe Amstelstraat 3-5
1011 PL Amsterdam
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "FCS" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
26 Jul 2007 10:23:44 AM |
|
|
On Jul 26, 3:48 am, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a6cbce$0$4722$4c368...@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Chief Eunuch of the king would be worth noting. The CE of some
other major family would be worth noting. That no one is named implies>>he was the CE of the temple that is mentioned as that is the only
employer not worth mentioning to further identify him. It is why we
would not bother to mention which congress sends a bill to the president
of the US for signing.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
Exactly - so when we find a chief eunuch mentioned in a tablet and a chief
eunuch with the same name and living at the same time mentioned in the
Bible, we conclude that they are the same person.
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Well, hate to butt back in again (I've a
feeling I may not consider this wise, in
time, but have no belief either way.
Mahomet, Mohammed, Muhammad, Mohamed, and
various other variations are considered by
the ONS, right here and now, where UK kids'
names are concerned to be the same but to
reflect different Geographical origins such
as Suadi Arabia, India, Pakistan, Indonesia.
Apparently Jon, John, Sean, Shaun, Ian, Ivan
Iain, Johan, Jovan, Johannes and suchlike are
not. They are different names. Officially.
This perhaps represents the maturity of the
UK's demographic data now it's settling a
little, but also reflects the views of the
various linguistic communities the names
come from.
Linguistic change is alluded to in the Jewish
writings, the most well-know example being
the word "Shibboleth"
We are talking about an after-the-fact
transliteration of a Babylonian name into
Hebrew (for Jeremiah, Hebrew, so Greek is
foxing things up unneccessarily) to start
with by someone whose sound auditory-cognitive
neurones (the sounds they recognise easily)
will tend to the Hebrew to start with.
Not provable, but entirely reasonable.
I agree, on the information I've seen.
So which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
26 Jul 2007 09:59:58 PM |
|
|
FCS wrote:
On Jul 26, 3:48 am, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a6cbce$0$4722$4c368...@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Chief Eunuch of the king would be worth noting. The CE of some
other major family would be worth noting. That no one is named implies>>he was the CE of the temple that is mentioned as that is the only
employer not worth mentioning to further identify him. It is why we
would not bother to mention which congress sends a bill to the president
of the US for signing.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
Exactly - so when we find a chief eunuch mentioned in a tablet and a chief
eunuch with the same name and living at the same time mentioned in the
Bible, we conclude that they are the same person.
The name is not same. Are you unable to read?
Well, hate to butt back in again (I've a
feeling I may not consider this wise, in
time, but have no belief either way.
Mahomet, Mohammed, Muhammad, Mohamed, and
various other variations are considered by
the ONS, right here and now, where UK kids'
names are concerned to be the same but to
reflect different Geographical origins such
as Suadi Arabia, India, Pakistan, Indonesia.
Apparently Jon, John, Sean, Shaun, Ian, Ivan
Iain, Johan, Jovan, Johannes and suchlike are
not. They are different names. Officially.
Yes. George III lead the colonial armies and General George Washington was the
military dictator of Britain. The name is spelled exactly the same. They were
both Englishmen. Isn't that enough to prove they were the same person doing an
El Capitan scheme?
English has evolved so far the first names no longer have meanings and some
surnames have meanings so obscure that we can only guess what they originally
meant. Because English is such a polyglot language and because the root meanings
of the names have mostly passed out of common usage and because of the tradition
of using names of saints we tend to assume names having comprehensible meanings
are a rarity.
This perhaps represents the maturity of the
UK's demographic data now it's settling a
little, but also reflects the views of the
various linguistic communities the names
come from.
Linguistic change is alluded to in the Jewish
writings, the most well-know example being
the word "Shibboleth"
We are talking about an after-the-fact
transliteration of a Babylonian name into
Hebrew (for Jeremiah, Hebrew, so Greek is
foxing things up unneccessarily) to start
with by someone whose sound auditory-cognitive
neurones (the sounds they recognise easily)
will tend to the Hebrew to start with.
However the names would have different trans_lations_ and if it were shown both
meant the same thing such as "Nabu Is Praised By Me" or whatever in both forms
then there would be a case. Marduk-zer-ibni is another name given on the tablet
which has some meaning related to the god Marduk.
It cannot be a transliteration as Babylon is not phonetic. The symbol takes its
meaning from the context. So one has to find the Aramaic or Phoenician words
which mean the same thing as the rest of the name to see if the two names mean
the same thing. And if they do you still have the George problem.
And if close enough counts in bible work then are not Matthias, Matthew and
Mattathias all the same person? Of course not as the facts of their stories are
different. It is the same with these two names.
Not provable, but entirely reasonable.
I agree, on the information I've seen.
From the story, here is what you have.
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 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.
Here is what you do not have.
as "the chief eunuch" of Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon.
There is no basis in the tablet to show the king was the II.
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.
As above spelling is immaterial. What the names mean is all that matters. Do
they mean the same thing?
You do not have him identified as the chief eunuch _of the king_. You have a
different name until the two are shown to mean the same thing. If you try to
force him to be the chief eunuch of the king then in the bible you have someone
else who was chief officer of the king. You don't get passed GO unless you can
show the senior military of the king were also eunuchs. Those two do not usually
go together.
--
One finger is all a real American needs.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3838
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
book review http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/willing-executioners.phtml a7
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
27 Jul 2007 01:47:19 AM |
|
|
In message <46a97b82$0$30627$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
There is no basis in the tablet to show the king was the II.
Oh dear oh dear! How well you deserve the name Matt the Pratt.
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.
Ah, so you admit that he is an Assyriologist and therefore knows far more
about the subject than you ever will.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
27 Jul 2007 10:05:53 PM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46a97b82$0$30627$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
There is no basis in the tablet to show the king was the II.
Oh dear oh dear! How well you deserve the name Matt the Pratt.
Show me the evidence from the tablet that it is the II. Please take all the
screens you need.
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.
Ah, so you admit that he is an Assyriologist and therefore knows far more
about the subject than you ever will.
That is why everyone must wait until it is published and then we can see if
other people in that field agree with him.
Which exhibits in which museums support the OT?
--
As pf July 2007, the Iraq war is costing the same as three nuclear aircraft
carriers every month. Never again question the cost of a carrier.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3841
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Iraqi democracy http://www.giwersworld.org/911/armless.phtml a3
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
28 Jul 2007 01:02:37 AM |
|
|
In message <46aacf48$0$29645$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Show me the evidence from the tablet that it is the II. Please take all the
screens you need.
Writing style, vocabulary used, level in which the tablet was found.
Try learning a bit about archaeology before you post to an archaeology
newsgroup.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
28 Jul 2007 09:02:55 PM |
|
|
Kendall K. Down wrote:
In message <46aacf48$0$29645$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Show me the evidence from the tablet that it is the II. Please take all the
screens you need.
Writing style, vocabulary used, level in which the tablet was found.
Your assertion has nothing to do with reality.
Try learning a bit about archaeology before you post to an archaeology
newsgroup.
You are so expert in Babylonian cuneiform that you can tell the slight changes
from one generation to the next? I am truly impressed that you can discern such
differences over a mere 20-30 years of separation.
You are getting as silly now as you continue to be pretending you have named
the exhibits and the museums which support the OT.
--
The families of every Iraqi we have killed has an absolute right in law and
morality to kill Americans to balance the scales.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3840
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Israel says no extermination
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/holo-survivors.phtml a13
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kendall K. Down" |
|
| Title: Re: Tiny Tablet Provides Proof For Old Testament |
29 Jul 2007 02:42:23 AM |
|
|
In message <46ac0d3b$0$8045$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Writing style, vocabulary used, level in which the tablet was found.
Your assertion has nothing to do with reality.
I asserted nothing. I merely recited the methods by which a tablet is dated.
You are so expert in Babylonian cuneiform that you can tell the slight changes
from one generation to the next? I am truly impressed that you can discern such
differences over a mere 20-30 years of separation.
I made no claim to be an expert - but the people who assigned the tablet to
Nebuchadnezzar II are experts and I have no doubts they can do just that.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
