Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

Dear Yitzhak,

> On 8/5/05, Read, James C wrote:
>
> >  No. The biblical authors say a lot more about these kings, and several
> >  other archaeologically attested Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian kings,
> >  not to mention the Moabite Mesha` and various others, than just their
> >  names. In the Bible there is quite a lot of archaeologically confirmed
> >  information about their territories, their careers, their military
> >  campaigns etc etc.
>  > END QUOTE
> >
>  > I should expect that now he will answer something like 'This only proves
> >  that they knew their names and certain details about their territories,
> >  their careers...'.
> >
> >  It appears that they want external evidence for every single word of every
> >  book just because it now belongs in the canon and this seems to make them
> >  distrust it as a reliable source.
> >  If only other historical sources were so complete and so honest about the
> >  failings of their kings.
>
> I was wondering, could you name some specific ANE historical source that is
> not as complete or as honest as the Bible?

HH: I think James is referring to the tendency of pharaohs and 
Mesopotamian kings to avoid their failures and battle losses in their 
inscriptions.

>   Also, if the Bible is so complete
> and so honest, why does it "forget" to mention Ahab's participation in the
> Battle of Qarqar, which is generally regarding as a successful attempt to
> thwart Assyrian advances.

HH: The Bible is not primarily a history book. It is a religious 
book. It mentions historical events as they pertain to the nation's 
relationship with God. Evidently the battle of Qarqar was not chosen 
to highlight aspects of that relationship. James probably meant that 
the Bible was complete in its exposure of its protagonists' 
weaknesses and failures.

>   Does the Bible perhaps want us to think that
> Ahab was not an internationally recognized powerful king who made success-
> ful military campaigns, but rather that he only participated in border
> skirmishes?

HH: I don't think that the Bible was distorting history. It shows 
Ahab in a significant battle, even if you characterize it as a 
"border skirmish." He is in an alliance with Jehoshaphat in 1 Kings 
22, but that battle is only mentioned for its spiritual significance. 
The Bible alludes to the fact that Ahab did a great many things, but 
it does not dwell on them:

1Kings 22:39 Now the rest of the acts of Ahab, and all that he did, 
and the ivory house which he made, and all the cities that he built, 
are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of 
Israel?

> Or why does Mesha in the Mesha stele claim he revolted under Omri's son?
> Does he have some hidden agenda in claiming that?  Is it not possible that
> the Bible just "slightly corrected" the date of revolt of Mesha so as to
> "fulfill" the prophecy in 1 Kings 21:28 - 29?

HH: Omri was the founder of the dynasty. We all should be familiar 
with the fact that the term "son" can mean grandson or even more 
distant kinship links. So a revolt at the time of Ahab's son would 
fulfill the words of the Mesha stele:

2Kings 1:1 Then Moab rebelled against Israel after the death of Ahab.

2Kings 3:1 Now Jehoram the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel in 
Samaria the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned 
twelve years.

2Kings 3:4 And Mesha king of Moab was a sheepmaster, and rendered 
unto the king of Israel an hundred thousand lambs, and an hundred 
thousand rams, with the wool.
2Kings 3:5 But it came to pass, when Ahab was dead, that the king of 
Moab rebelled against the king of Israel.
2Kings 3:6 And king Jehoram went out of Samaria the same time, and 
numbered all Israel. 

                                        Yours,
                                        Harold Holmyard