Real Archaeology Yields Impressive Biblical Finding

We thank gentle reader Bryan D for linking us to the breaking news of a significant archaeological discovery in that most important of archaeological sites, the British Museum's basement.

To wit: a sixth-century B.C. Babylonian cuneiform tablet, one of thousands that for years has lain in storage untranscribed and untranslated at the storied museum, has been deciphered to reveal the name "Nebo-Sarsekim."

Big deal, right? Well, yes. Nebo-Sareskim is a name that appears in Jeremiah 39:3. Gentle readers are forgiven if they did not recall the appearance of this name in the prophet's book.

In the words of the popular press, the finding on the tablet "proves" the historical accuracy of the Jeremiah text. Indeed, it does indicate that it is extremely likely that a Babylonian official of such a name existed at the very time named by Jeremiah. If we allow that such is the nature of historical proof, and more especially if we affirm that biblical texts are not assumed to be historically false in the absence of such evidence from other ancient texts, we find such statements to be reasonable. So three cheers for that.

This episode yields many lessons that SWNID is too happy to draw:

• People who want to do archaeology but also want to stay indoors and sleep every night in a comfortable bed should learn the ancient Mesopotamian languages and get to work transcribing and translating cuneiform tablets at the British Museum. There are several lifetimes of work still in crates at that august institution. We add that the ability to write successful grant applications would help as well, as there isn't a lot of money lying around to support this kind of work.
• Real archaeological findings are seldom as spectacular as the archo-porn (e.g. the Jesus Tomb) that lately dominates the mainstream media near the dates of the major Christian holidays. Nevertheless, unspectacular finds related to the Bible are still pretty cool. They also tend to get announced at times unrelated to Christian holidays.
• The Bible need not be suspected as a historically reliable source because of its religious message. Neither should nonbiblical ancient texts be trusted historically because they no longer seem religiously, politically or socially relevant. Every text has a message, and every message reflects a bias, but biases aren't the same as falsehood. We generally don't read texts of any kind with a powerful hermeneutic (translation: method of interpretation) of suspicion, i.e., with the assumption that apart from corroborative evidence, the text is assumed to be false. The Bible shouldn't be read that way either. Most of the Bible has not been and will never be found to intersect with other ancient texts. That should not surprise, and it shouldn't count againt the Bible. That's the nature of ancient texts.
• Despite all the attention to atheism in the media these days, Christianity remains a subject of deep and wide interest, far more interesting to people of all human cultures than any other subject, including even the non-Christian religions that some of them practice. There would be less attention to these heaps of tablets than there is if the tablets did not hold out some promise of yielding findings like this one. And other findings will never get the publicity given those that connect in any way, even one as obscure as this one, to the Christian Scriptures.
• Those who check the reference to Jeremiah will find that various versions have differently divided up the list of names in this verse. Such happens in the translation of ancient texts that didn't employ spaces between the words. It's worth noting that the absence of spaces creates real problems in translation mostly in texts with lots of obscure proper names. Otherwise, the divisions are clear from the context. But expect for translations from now on to list Nebo-Sarsekim, not "Samgar-nebo" and then "Sarsekim." We're sure that the families of these gentlemen will appreciate seeing their names reproduced properly.
• We continue to wait in vain for even the first archaeological discovery that relates even remotely to the Book of Mormon. Actually, we don't wait. We have given that up. Books that purport to have been delivered by angels and read with magic spectacles aren't in the same category as books that purport to have been written in ancient times and continuously handed down through generations.