Archaeology Confirms That the Bible Is History
In 2007, assyriologist Dr Michael Jursa found the name Nebo-Sarsekim in a dirt report in the English Exhibition hall. The subtleties referenced in the tablet composed around 595 BC relate to what the Book of Jeremiah says regarding the Babylonian attack of Jerusalem that occurred during the rule of the Babylonian lord Nebuchadnezzar II.
The report is huge, as the Babylonian authority who momentarily shows up in Jeremiah 39:3 is an extremely minor person in the record, and shows the scriptural creator has recorded the realities accurately.
Nebo-Sarsekim was for sure present at the hour of the attack, very much like Jeremiah says.
Finding archeological help for the Holy book has become so typical that in 2014 Scriptural Paleontology Audit (BAR) distributed an article entitled Paleohistory Affirms 50 Genuine Individuals in the Holy book.
The title is to some degree misdirecting, however, as it just arrangements with Hebrew Scriptures characters. Had it included individuals referenced in the New Confirmation, the rundown might have been significantly longer. In Jerusalem, for example, archeologists have uncovered lots of proof supporting the Holy book’s set of experiences.
Sir William Ramsey (1852-1916) set out as a cynic to negate the unwavering quality of the Holy book. Yet, the more he dug into the subtleties of the Demonstrations of the Messengers, the more persuaded he turned into that Luke, its creator, was a five star student of history and had recorded even little subtleties, like the titles of neighborhood Roman authorities, accurately.
This is surprisingly noteworthy, as the titles fluctuated by spot and time and a specific title could have been utilized for a short period ever.
Apparently Luke committed no errors.
A comparable pattern can be tracked down in convictions about the dependability of the Hebrew Scripture. The Hittites were once remembered to be non-existent, until The days of Noah archeologists found proof that showed the Hebrew Scriptures authors had been correct.
Another captivating point of interest has to do with Belshazzar and Nabonidus. In 1854 classicist Sir Henry Rawlinson, who was unearthing at the old city of Ur found an engraving, which expressed that Nabonidus declared that his oldest child Bel-shar-usur (for example Belshazzar) could utilize the imperial title.
Consequently, this assists us with understanding the reason why the Book of Daniel records that Belshazzar is called lord (Dan. 5:1) and why he vowed to make the person who could make sense of a horrendous vision the third ruler in the realm (Dan. 5:7).
The Dark Monolith of Shalmaneser III, as of now kept at the English Exhibition hall, incorporates an intriguing point of interest: a vassal ruler prostrates himself before the Assyrian lord.
This occurred during when Hazael, Ruler of Syria, battled against Jehu, Lord of Israel in the ninth century B.C. In 841 B.C Jehu clearly went to request that the Assyrian ruler help him against Hazael. The text on the Dark Pillar says:
“The recognition of Jehu, child of Omri: I got from him silver, gold, a brilliant bowl, a brilliant jar with pointed base, brilliant tumblers, brilliant pails, tin, a staff for a ruler [and] lances.”