« Links Mentioned on the 12/11/15 Show | Main | Is Man Born Sinful? »

December 12, 2015

Comments

Amy,

Do you also enjoy the periodic reminders from archaeology findings that point out all the errors in the Bible as well? Check out a very unbiased book by an Israeli archeologist named Isreal Finkelstein titled "The Bible Unearthed".

Flying Donkey,

There's no such thing as a purely "unbiased" archeologist. The key is to look at the facts. And the more archeological findings there are, the more the facts become uncovered which are supportive of the historical accuracy of Scripture.

Daniel,

Merry Christmas and I hope all is well with you. The unbiased thing goes both ways, Christian apologetics are highly biased, the most biased writing I've ever read, however and obviously there are various degrees of biasness.

The most convincing reporting is when someone is biased towards A but after investigating the facts they determine B. Such is the case with the book I mentioned. As an Isreali Finkelstein had every reason to reach opposite conclusions but inspite of his bias he went another direction.

Also my apologizes to Amy and everyone else that reads my post, I was in a hurry and typed that post really fast, I didn't mean for it to be or sound insulting. Just wanted to bring some perspective. The find of the seal was an exciting discovery.

Again, all the best.

Isaiah 37:33-37

“Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city, shoot an arrow there, come before it with a shield, or cast up a siege ramp against it. 34 By the way that he came, by the same he shall return; he shall not come into this city, says the Lord. 35 For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David.”

36 Then the angel of the Lord set out and struck down one hundred eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians; when morning dawned, they were all dead bodies. 37 Then King Sennacherib of Assyria left, went home, and lived at Nineveh.

Compare with:

The chronicles of the Assyrian kings Sargon II and Sennacherib, who laid siege to Jerusalem under Hezekiah's watch, describe the Israelite ruler paying tribute to them to fend off attacks.

So, which is it? Did the Judeans avoid conquest by paying tribute to the Assyrians, or was the Assyrian army wholly destroyed overnight by the supernatural power of the Lord, in a glorious victory for Judah?


>> Christian apologetics are highly biased, the most biased writing I've ever read, however and obviously there are various degrees of biasness.

Ahhh, FD attacked ... Daniel parried. That's the nature of apologetics. Raise an issue, and expect a response.

This isn't bias. It is an honest attempt to "be ready at any time when you are questioned about the hope which is in you, to give an answer in the fear of the Lord and without pride." (1 Pt. 3:15) To declare bias is to insist that your positions are correct and unassailable. So when they are assailed, the bias claim makes no sense.

Phillip A.

Why not both? Hezekiah gives tribute to Sargon, but with the passing of Assyrian power to Sennacherib, the need to hold Jerusalem, which had been considering alliances with Egypt, and whose position in the land-bridge between Asia and Africa was a strategic advantage.

By the way, the Assyrian king Sargon was once noted by Isaiah. The Biblical critics of the late nineteenth century claimed Isaiah was fradulent for claiming an unknown king. Then archaeology found the Nineveh library accounts that mentioned Sargon. Classic example of Bible affirmed by archaeology.

DGFischer, no, that's not correct. It is Sennacherib, not Sargon, who reports in the Annals that the Assyrian army laid siege to Jerusalem. He does not give the specifics on how the siege ended, but he does report receiving a large quantity of booty from Jerusalem, and having no further problems with Hezekiah. Draw your own conclusions.

Now contrast that with the Biblical account, which has 185,000 Assyrian soldiers dying overnight. For perspective, that is slightly more than the current fighting strength of the entire United States Marine Corps. An army of that size would never be required to attack a little city like Jerusalem, and, if it was wiped out, it would at least merit a little note in the Annals.

Sennacherib's own account is that of blocking up Hezekiah "as a bird in a cage." This in an account of bloody conquests of other towns and cities. Laid siege, but not conquered. In line with Scripture's account.

Note as a comparison Herodotus' account of Sennacherib's invasion of Egypt and his encampment undone by "mice gnawing the bow strings" (History 2: 142) as the reason for Sennacherib's sudden retreat. Whimsical, until one notes a connection between mice and plague situations.

Are you sure about your Sargon placement? Sargon was noted for the destruction of the northern kingdom and was noted by Isaiah before any historical scholar realized this Assyrian monarch actually existed. But his conquest and association with Tiglath-Pileser III initiated concerns of an alliance (the Ashdod Coalition) to prevent further Assyrian inroads to the south. Hezekiah's sketchy support for this early resolution to the new Assyrian problem brought down Assyrian ire when that Empire moved towards Egypt.

The comments to this entry are closed.