Question Concerning Inspiration
joebaker at cygnus.uwa.edu.au
Wed Dec 6 06:58:03 EST 2000
Ian again you are saying
That there is no hard evidence for a Judah before the time of Hezekiah
That the first evidence for a Judah springs from the time of the demise the
It is good to see you now qualify such statement by the use of "roughly" as
I have several times before have had to correct you.
As you know in 701 Sennacherib mentions Hezekiah (Hazaqiau of Yaudi).
But earlier, in 734, Tiglathpileser records the tribute of Yauahaz of Yaudi
(the geographic order in this tribute list shows that Yaudi is Judah). This
ruler can be identified as the Biblical Ahaz father of Hezekiah.
There is also a seal of "'Hz, [son of] Yhwtm, mlk of Yhdh". This can only be
the Biblical Ahaz son of Jotham.
So we now have confirmation of a kingdom of Judah and proof of the names of
kings extending back at least two generations from Hezekiah (and of course
we have contemporary mentions of Manasseh and Jehoiachin).
And this is only for Judah, in Israel we have Omri, Ahab 853, Jehu 841,
Jehoash 796, Menahem 738, Pekah 732 and Hoshea 732. So 11 kings mentioned in
contemporary inscriptions, from Moab, Assyria and Babylon, match the
Biblical record. Indeed these inscriptions only name kings of Israel and
Judah known from the Biblical record. Not one of them names a king who is
not mentioned in the Book of Kings. 11 out of 11 is good odds (with a
possibility of increasing this if the Tell Dan stela is correctly
translated, and several seals referring to servants of people whose names
are the same as Biblical kings).
So essentially contemporary inscription show the accuracy of the King list
within the book of Kings. Given this, what is the odds that during the
reigns of Omri and Ahab a king of Judah named Jehoshaphat ruled from
Jerusalem. Surely it is not zero? I would say it was highly likely.
Joe Baker ===========\
Western Australia ===/
More information about the b-hebrew